The lawsuit, brought by a widowed, black mom in Nevada on behalf of her mixed-race child, William Clark, contends that when her son’s public school recently overhauled its curriculum to incorporate “intersectionality” and “critical race theory,” the materials “were not descriptive or informational in nature, but normative and prescriptive.

Proponents of Critical Race Theory (CRT) often write about it as if their dogma was established and acceptable fact, an ideological fait accompli that only a racist would oppose. Nothing could be further from the truth. Conservatives and old-school liberals have consistently and thoughtfully challenged both the underlying tenets and the application of CRT since it began gaining popularity in workplaces and schools.

Not surprisingly, CRT supporters have responded with bad faith arguments; consider New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg, who last week claimed that attempts by state legislators to halt the long march of CRT in schools were egregious acts of censorship.

Goldberg is being disingenuous when she downplays the concerns CRT critics have with the coercive way these theories are “taught,” particularly to K-12 school children. CRT’s critics aren’t arguing that no one has the right to talk and write about CRT (particularly among adults on college campuses); they are resisting the implication that CRT is a settled and acceptable dogma. They also take issue with the way this theory is being imposed on schoolchildren, many of whom have been forced to denounce immutable parts of themselves, such as their skin color and sex, in CRT struggle sessions. Similar objections to the coercive and racially discriminatory nature of CRT ideology have been raised in the context of mandatory workplace training.

It’s notable that Goldberg says nothing about the compulsory nature of CRT training in K-12 education, where it has been introduced not as an addition to existing curricula but as a replacement for it. That’s because the zeal with which its promoters have pursued this effort has already prompted lawsuits, like this one, which makes for chilling reading.

The lawsuit, brought by a widowed, black mom in Nevada on behalf of her mixed-race child, William Clark, contends that when her son’s public school recently overhauled its curriculum to incorporate “intersectionality” and “critical race theory,” the materials “were not descriptive or informational in nature, but normative and prescriptive: they require pupils to ‘unlearn’ and ‘fight back’ against ‘oppressive’ structures.” Moreover, “some racial, sexual, gender and religious identities, once revealed, are officially singled out in the programming as inherently problematic, and assigned pejorative moral attributes” by teachers and administrators. Students who felt uncomfortable participating were penalized in their class exercises and graded homework assignments.

The lawsuit describes how one teacher greeted the boy’s class with “Hello my wonderful social justice warriors!” before telling each student to “label and identify” their gender, racial, and religious identities as part of “an independent reflection” exercise, which was graded. Next, students were told to determine if “that part of your identity has privilege or oppression attached to it.”

Read More