L.E. Kesselman
2 min readJun 21, 2021


Two thoughts, Nick. First, you AND Senator Crabtree acknowledge that Critical Race Theory is difficult to define. You said it is in flux,

"as a theory, it is constantly changing. It’s been around for forty years. As any social, political, or legal theory ages, there will be multiple interpretations. That’s true of theories originating from either the left and the right: constitutionalism, socialism..."

The same can be said for string theory in modern physics. Teaching string theory isn't legislated against! Yet neither string theory, nor constitutionalism, socialism, nor most other political or legal theories are taught to K-8 children (kindergarten through grade 8). In contrast, critical race theory IS being incorporated in school curricula as a framework for children aged 4 through 14. Should children aged 4 to 14 be taught about their white privilege, "that may result in white [6- and 10-yr-olds] feeling guilt due to their skin color"? I don't think any child should be subjected to that.

Returning to the "multiple theories of some CRT believers": some say that refusal to accept CRT is prima facie evidence of racism. You mention this too, and I have observed similarly. So, once again, I would ask, is this reasonable to teach to 4 to 14 year old children?

You mentioned that

"Oklahoma Republican Gov. Kevin Stitt signed a bill into law that prohibited teaching that “individuals, by virtue of race or gender, are inherently racist, sexist or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously.”

Kevin Stitt is the first Cherokee governor of Oklahoma. He isn't an Elizabeth Warren-type of indigenous person! It seems reasonable to me that he would not want Cherokee (or any other indigenous children) to be taught by United States public schools that (due solely to their skin color) "they are racist, sexist, or oppressive". Recall the Trail of Tears? Think about how laws have impacted the lives of indigenous peoples.

As for advocates of CRT being unrealistically optimistic in thinking that they can

"convince most people in a nation (i.e. white people) to behave in a way that helps a minority but which may result in fewer benefits to themselves"

they need to study American history e.g. Lyndon B. Johnson, the Civil Rights Act, Great Society programs, affirmative action (past and present), Equal Opportunity Employment (EEOC), and the immeasurable acts of charity and fellowship by 15+ decades of white people for the benefit of minorities, even to the detriment of their own prospects.