With all due respect to that impressive list of organizations ("Joint statement on legislative efforts to restrict education about racism in American history,” Loudoun Times-Mirror, June 18, 2021), those groups--and even our governor, unfortunately (p. 8)--simply don’t get it. The effort against Critical Race Theory (CRT) doesn’t “restrict” education about racism in America. Instead, it tries to expand the approach to our history to include more relevant—and truthful--facts, rather than an attempt to teach a toxic, anti-historical brew of one-sided, grossly distorted and inflammatory rhetoric that places ALL struggles of Black Americans on the shoulders of our Founders and, sadly, on children in our classrooms.

No? Then, why are our children being exposed to such CRT—formulated and endorsed terms as “white supremacy,” “oppressors,” “victims,” “structural racism,” “white supremacy,” “antiracist" and other loaded code words which mask a dishonest view of our history? CRT is not any sort of “honest reckoning,” as your opinion piece asserts. As Dr. Carol Swain states, [CRT teaches that] “…every dysfunctional condition in black urban communities can be traced to slavery and its aftermath. There is no place [in CRT] for individual choice or initiative” (or, I might add, any discussion of the enormous progress that Black Americans have made).

(2) comments


MLK would be turning over in his grave at the thought of CRT and how it is being used by school systems today. At the core of CRT or any of the disguises it wears ("equity", etc) is the idea that any problem or trouble a black person has is because of racism and slavery, and because of white people. Basically tells them the deck is stacked against them, because of and for their white classmates. How awful to teach that to black children, to give them a built in reason for failure. And how awful to teach white children they are responsible for that failure. Hearing grownups with a brain in their heads use the term white privilege sounds silly and frankly, stupid.


It sounds like your argument is not against teaching the history of racism in this country, including current day instances, but only with the terminology used and how it makes our children feel based on their race or background. Is that right?

I agree the history of racism is a sensitive topic and words matter. I also matters how these lessons are taught and the objective of the lessons. I would hope the objectives would include both understanding the forces that have driven racism in this country and the forces that have pushed back against that racism, including black striving for freedom, strength and independence, John Brown and the abolitionists, Union soldiers in the Civil War and so many more.

I do think terminology helps make explicit forces that had previously not been named and, as a white person, have no problem with defining and using the terms “white supremacy,” “oppressors,” “victims,” “structural racism,” “antiracist."

White supremacy is a real thing that existed in the past (e.g. KKK) and still exists today in self-proclaimed white supremacist groups.

I do not believe that any group is a permanent "oppressor" or "victim," but in specific instances of history (e.g. slavery, lynch mobs), there were clear oppressors and victims. It does no one any good to be vague about this.

Structural racism clearly still exists in this country, or we wouldn't have the built up disparities in health and prosperity across racial groups. Disparate loans to black farmers vs. white farmers, lack of social security benefits for job categories historically held by people of color etc.

Anti racist draws a distinction between passively not being personally prejudiced or racist and the more socially active role of speaking out from my (white lady) person of privilege against continuing racist forces in society. It means saying loudly that the murder of George Floyd was unequivocally wrong, rather than reflexively excusing the police conduct as the more important issue.

"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." MLK

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for reading!

Please purchase a subscription to read our premium content. If you have a subscription, please log in or sign up for an account on our website to continue.