4.1: Definitional Writing Introduction and Texts

One of the hallmarks of good writing is having clear definitions of used terminology. After all, what does it mean when a writer drones on and on about a particular subject, but the reader has no idea what the writer is talking about or perhaps has a different idea altogether? Take for example the term Critical Race Theory (or CRT). For the last few years, the term has been bandied about on mainstream media, in state halls of power, and within social media circles as a dreaded but vague concept. Those who have only heard of this concept through watching CNN or Fox News or through emails from rightwing politicians could be forgiven for thinking that CRT is some radical revision of history invented to divide people based on the color of their skin, to make white children feel guilty for crimes they personally never participated in, or to make Black people perpetual victims. On the other hand, those who read between the lines may see CRT instead as any teaching curriculum that tells the truth about racist history and laws in the United States. While closer to the truth, the fact is that Critical Race Theory (like Intersectionalism) is a legal framework first and foremost and created for better legal representation. The way the term is used is as a boogey-man placeholder. Because few understand what the term means, fear factories can place whatever value they want on it so that they do not have to come right out and say what they mean: that acknowledging history makes them look bad.

To truly understand such a charged and obscured term, we should look at the experts. As you read the following excerpts from scholars and educators, pay attention to how they define the term:

From Daniel D. Liou and Raquel Alvara:

In reality, CRT is a theoretical framework, methodology, and praxis used to challenge assumptions associated with race neutrality by illuminating systemic racism and other intersectional forms of oppression in education, law, and society (Dixson et al., 2017; Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995; Ledesma & Calderón, 2015; Solózano & Yosso, 2002). However, recently CRT has been conflated as a catchall phrase to weaponize against school-based curriculum focused on fostering justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion (López et al., 2021). In the fall of 2021 in Texas, books related to diversity were banned and some teachers were instructed to teach opposing views to issues such as the Holocaust and slavery to avoid offending families in favor of those views (Hixenbaugh & Hylton, 2021). These dynamics alleged teachers were implementing critical race theory to indoctrinate students, despite evidence showing the majority of U.S. schools are not teaching such curriculum (McCausland, 2021).

From Vera Kennedy and Rowena Bermio:

Critical Race Theory (CRT) is a socio-intellectual movement of civil rights scholars and activists who challenge approaches to racial justice in U.S. laws. A key concept of CRT is intersectionality and how forms of inequality and identity are affected by race, class, gender, and disability. CRT emphasizes critical thinking about race, views race as a social construct, uses storytelling to explore lived experiences, and argues the idea of race advances the interests of Whites at the expense of people of color. CRT challenges the idea that U.S. law is neutral and color-blind. The movement began in the 1960s, but in 2020 became the focus of U.S. conservative lawmakers to ban and restrict the instruction of CRT and anti-racism education in primary and secondary schools in response to White grievance, guilt, and shame. Those opposed to CRT have misrepresented its principles and significance. CRT has not been part of the U.S. primary and secondary school curriculum. Its study and writings have historically been examined in higher education. Banning or restricting the work of CRT silences discussions about the history of race, racism, equality, and social justice.

And from Gary Minda:

As the 1980s came to a close, a new movement in legal thought emerged offering a new epistemological source for law derived from the "actual experience, history, culture, and intellectual tradition of people of color." This movement developed as racial-minority scholars within critical legal studies and other progressive networks established "an African American movement" in legal studies to approach problems of race from the unique perspective of African Americans. Critical race theorists asserted that it was time for "different and blacker voices [to] speak new words and remake old legal doctrines." The critical race theory movement emerged as minority scholars developed a race consciousness form of legal criticism. "Race consciousness " characterizes the jurisprudential perspective of minority scholars who emphasize the need for fundamental changes in the way the law constructs knowledge about race. Critical race theorists focus on racial consciousness to address the question of "color " in American law. The traditional view of the law of race discrimination has been structured by a silent category that distinguishes between people of different color. The color "white " has, for example, served as an implicit legal benchmark for determining whether the goal of legal equality has been achieved—equality requires that people of color enjoy the same formal rights and process as the dominant group. Critical race theorists argue that this way of thinking has the ideological consequence of convincing minorities that racial discrimination can only be eradicated through the implementation of color-blind meritocratic standards, which accord whites and blacks the same formal rights and process. Critical race theorists claim that when color is used in this way, it can reinforce racist attitudes prevailing in society that seek to justify the oppression of racial minorities. They contend that by generalizing the category of race, the law reinforces the stereotypes of minority groups that have historically subordinated all people of color. It is said that the law's generalization of the category of race suppresses knowledge about the different cultural experiences and attitudes of racial groups. Race consciousness is thus the critical method these scholars advance in their struggle to achieve racial equality in the law. Color of skin pigmentation is viewed by critical race scholars as a symbol of cultural and personal identity constructed by white society.

Bibliography:

Kennedy, Vera Guerrero, and Rowena Bermio. Our Lives: An Ethnic Studies Primer. West Hills College Lemoore, 2022, p. 127, https://pressbooks.pub/ourlives/.

Minda, Gary. “Critical Race Theory.” Postmodern Legal Movements: Law and Jurisprudence at Century’s End, NYU Press, 1995, pp. 167–86. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt9qg2gf.14. Accessed 26 Apr. 20204.

Liou, Daniel D., and Raquel Alvara. “Anti-Critical Race Theory Movement in Postsecondary Education: Faculty Expectations Confronting Emotionalities of Whiteness.” Journal of Higher Education Policy and Leadership Studies, vol. 2, no. 4, 2021, p. 78. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.52547/johepal.2.4.77.