Critical Race Theory: Propaganda? Or. . .
I was in my car when I heard the alarming headline about a ban on federal use of a “divisive, anti-American propaganda,” one that asserts that the USA and white people in particular are “inherently evil.” Amid this election season, we sure don’t need any more divisive propaganda, right? But wait! What? The next sentence I heard nearly gave me whiplash. The “propaganda” our government is attempting to prohibit is something I teach all the time, Critical Race Theory. It’s a set of five tenets, and, once you understand them, they’re not at all divisive. There’s no mention of evil. They aren’t about brainwashing or propaganda or any other method of closing people’s minds.
Actual WWII Propaganda appealing to fear and patriotism to control information. When might a gag order protect our rights to life and liberty? When might it endanger them?
Rather, they are all about opening the mind to think critically about any situation, so that we are less susceptible to swallowing actual propaganda and misinformation. For me, they have helped broaden my perspective to understand others whose lives are not like mine, which has made me feel more of a sense of connection than division. In the interest of combatting propaganda by laying out the facts and letting people decide for themselves, I’ve condensed the tenets here as a series of answers to the question: Critical Race Theory: Propaganda? Or. . .
. . . Hearing another side of the story.
One of the tenets of Critical Race Theory (CRT) is called “Counter-Storytelling.” We commonly hear that “history is written by the victors.” The idea of Counter-storytelling is to listen to the stories of people who are not in power. What have their experiences been? What has been difficult, joyful, resilient, traumatic, or hopeful?
If culture is like water and we’re like fish, hearing the Counter-Story is the audio-description of the water that I can’t see.
Hearing these things, especially as a member of the dominant group in our current society, helps me see what’s been hidden to me. If culture is like water and we’re like fish, hearing the Counter-Story is the audio-description of the water that I can’t see. And I benefit from that wider perspective.
. . . Seeing the patterns of our history.
Another tenet of CRT looks at the sweep of our history and notices the pattern of distribution of opportunities and barriers to them, even though those opportunities and barriers morph and change over time. At one time in this country it was legal to own another human being. During that time, the pattern was that people with darker skin were the essential workers in agriculture, care of children and food service. People with lighter skin were the beneficiaries of this work. Sound familiar? It’s been generations since the emancipation proclamation, but the Corona virus pandemic has exposed just how persistent that pattern is.
During that time, the pattern was that people with darker skin were the essential workers in agriculture, care of children and food service. People with lighter skin were the beneficiaries of this work. Sound familiar?
Likewise, during the Jim Crow era there were poll taxes and other legal barriers to Black people voting. We don’t have those any more, but polling station closures, new ID rules and other recent restrictions apply disproportionately to darker skinned people. This points to the CRT tenet called the “Permanence of Racism” - the idea that the more things change, the more they stay the same. This is hardly a new idea - my grandma told me this many times.
. . . Making the smartest deal you can.
This tenet is called “Interest Convergence.” It means that concessions are most likely to be made when they present some value to the side doing the conceding. People in power don’t necessarily just give up status or perks freely. They have to see something positive in it for themselves - so really, this is entry-level negotiation. Although it’s easy to get cynical about this one and imagine that people with less power have no agency, we can again look at the patterns of history and listen to the Counter-Stories to see that there is self-efficacy in crafting Interest Convergence to bring about positive change. I recently took a business course that called this method “collaborative negotiation,” a way to make lasting deals and solidify long-term relationships. Again, hardly a shocking idea, and also not a divisive one.
. . . Seeing that we’re not all the same.
My mom used to joke that of her three children, no two could be disciplined in the same way. Being excluded in time-outs worked for one of us; withholding allowance for another; work detail for the third. As I’ve talked to friends with more than one child they all say some version of this - no two are the same. Teachers know this as well - although all kids have potential for brilliance, budding scientists may not need the same things as young poets. And so it is with communities. Due to our personal experiences, family backgrounds, and cultural histories we all bring differences: Trauma and resilience, community connections and networks, access to resources. Layer on things like race, age, class, gender and sexual expression and you get a glimpse of the full complexity!
When is information truly dangerous? When is silencing it just Cancel Culture on a state level?
Ignoring this can lead to shallow and ineffectual “we all smile in the same language” strategies. My conservative friends may like the formal name of this tenet: Critique of Liberalism. My progressive friends may need to let that one sink in. Informally it’s often referred to as pushing back on color-blindness. It has different applications in education, law, and policy making, but they all stem from the observable truth that we are not all the same.
. . . Seeking self-determination.
Really, isn’t this what we all want? And isn’t it in our Constitution? Whenever an elite group makes decisions on where we can work or go to school, what we can do in public, who can be excluded from a space, it makes those of us not having input into the decisions feel frustrated, angry and defeated. I still remember the indignation I felt as a young woman being told "don’t worry your pretty little head” about a decision I was not making. Self-determination is about a basic sense of belonging, and a sense that we can make decisions for our families, not just to follow our values, but to participate in the common life of our communities.
Really, isn’t this what we all want? And isn’t it in our Constitution?
Because Critical Race Theory started out as legal scholarship, it uses property rights as a metaphor for this. If I own a property, I get to decide everything from what kind of house I build to whether I plant flowers, veggies or both, to who is invited into my house - and who is not. So, if the dominant norms of our society were a property, the group making the decisions for 400+ years has been the group that is racially white - hence the name “Whiteness as Property.”
But where’s the part about the “inherently evil” white people?
There isn’t one. Even in pointing out that white people have looked away from systemic patterns or controlled the narrative of our history for all this time isn’t saying that we white folks are inherently evil or personally bigoted. It’s saying that the impact of these actions is racially significant. Critical Race Theory isn’t even saying that white people maliciously intend to be exclusive or harmful when making decisions as though this country were our property, just that others reasonably feel frustrated (or, continuing the property metaphor, disowned or disinherited) that this kind of self-determination isn’t routinely extended to them.
“And whom does it serve to lock away these tools? Who benefits when we repeatedly hear only one side of the story, as though all our experiences were the same? “
And, isn’t it time that we recognized all of our investment in this country and forged a shared leadership? Frankly, similar frustration is also being demonstrated by rural people, who feel that city dwellers have been making the determinations. And by working class folks of all races who see the affluent crafting the rules. All these frustrations are ripping big holes in our social fabric. Critical Race Theory gives us tools to think and talk about these issues, together. Tools to knit a new social fabric.
And whom does it serve to lock away these tools? Who benefits when we repeatedly hear only one side of the story, as though all our experiences were identical? If we can’t drive a smart bargain for our self-determination, who are we allowing to make determinations for us? The answer is, a tiny sub-set of people, with life experiences similar to one another, who don’t know what it’s like to be anyone but themselves. As a white, urban, middle class person I can say that even with the most positive intentions, my perspective is limited unless I push myself to broaden it.
The good news is, the “top secret” Critical Race Theory is already published, widely available on the internet, and can’t be purged despite the efforts of those in power. CRT gives us a way to understand and hear beyond the anger and frustration, listen for the counter-stories, see the persistent patterns and appreciate that we’re not all the same, so a one-size-fits-all solution isn’t going to work. There will still be anger and frustration; there will still be loss and letting go. And, unlike a map of ships in wartime, these tools aren’t going to lead to death and destruction — instead, we can use them to craft some interest convergence for a collaborative, win-win deal.
If you are a leader in the cultural dominant in your organization and want to explore coaching on using Critical Race Theory to expand your perspective, sign up for a free 30-minute consultation call with Rie. It’s easy and you can pick the time that works best for you.