Critical Race Theory — Uncomfortable but Necessary Tool for Change Agents

Writing this editorial evokes strong emotions. In a recent tweet I indicated that the attacks against critical race theory (CRT) were misguided—rather, the attacks should be targeted toward the pernicious effects of racism that continue to permeate our society. The vocal CRT critics assert that it is divisive through its claims that American democracy is a lie (Karimi, 2021). For many it is a lie. Just ask the members of our citizenry who are victimized simply because they wear their Blackness, Brownness, or other outward displays of lack of privilege. CRT critics also target the 1619 Project for advancing racism and propaganda against America rather than its role of exposing all Americans to the history of African Americans (Camera, 2021). I will use this space to speak to social work educators about the essentiality of CRT in social work practice and education.

There are numerous articles that provide context for CRT. They generally speak about the theory in terms of it being an intellectual movement (De La Garza & Ono, 2016) that posits the role of White supremacy and White privilege in the disparities that exist in society. Activist scholars like Derrick Bell and Kimberly Crenshaw focus on the importance of acknowledging racist systems and making structural changes to bring about racial equality. Though initially focused on African Americans, CRT has expanded and extended to other marginalized groups with complementary theories including LatCrit, FemCrit, TribalCrit, DesiCrit, and QueerCrit.

CRT asks that we move from a “blaming the victim” to a “blaming or analyzing the system” approach to understanding the harmful treatment received by groups who have been marginalized by White supremacy and privilege. Its purpose is to transform systems through interrogating their roles in creating disparate practices that hurt, harm, and kill its victims. The core tenets of CRT are (a) the notion that racism is ordinary and not aberrational; (b) the idea of an interest convergence; (c) the social construction of race; (d) the idea of storytelling and counter-storytelling; and (e) the notion that Whites have been recipients of civil rights legislation (Hartlep, 2009).

Additionally, CRT asks that we not confuse progress with a postracial society. It insists that we not discount the historical trauma that exists and has not been erased by the legislative changes in our democracy. Three years ago, I attended my 50th high school reunion of a school that I had the challenge of desegregating in 1966. In the 2-day 50-year reunion event, no one called me a “coon” or worse, but my memory of these attacks was not erased. As I looked at the list of classmates who had passed, I noted the disproportionate number who were Blacks. And I wondered how much the negative experiences, camouflaged by resilience, had added to their high allostatic loads and resulted in their premature deaths. The fact that progress has been made in 50 years has not erased the memories of hostility and pervasive harm. That is yet another reason why CRT is critically important in social work—it allows us to start where the individual is or “has been.”

As social work educators, we have a responsibility to embrace theories that counteract the racism that has historically guided too many of our approaches to working with vulnerable groups. Yes, theories should be challenged and critically examined. But let us also challenge the theories that have historically disregarded the existence of unique experiences of African Americans and failed to include them in the governmentally supported “gold standard” evidence-based practices. This is indeed hard work. Why? Because when we challenge the practices that we have so willingly embraced, we recognize our part of the problem. White privilege is indeed part of the problem, and moving to becoming part of the solution begins with reckoning with our roles in carrying out the “master’s” plans. This is the hard work. It is easy to declare antiracism as a stance and yet neglect to engage in any meaningful change in behaviors that continue the status quo under a different name.

CRT moves from shallow apologies to ownership of roles in perpetuating harm, hurt, and death to those we serve. It is unapologetic about “calling out” the role of White privilege and White supremacy in systems of harm. Yet, CRT also offers the tools to dismantle these practices through acknowledgment, examination, and eradication of harmful practices. Allow me to go back to my high school reunion experience. Not one time did anyone (including teachers) come to my defense for the racial hurts during my teens; however, 50 years later, several persons acknowledged that my experience must have been hard and with sincerity apologized for their silence. This is a start.

CRT allows us the opportunity for new starts that do not deny the past but rather work to create a new narrative for carrying out our social work values of the dignity and worth of persons and the importance of human relationships. CRT, like every other theory, should undergo critical analysis. Critical analysis, however, is not the same as blaming it for perpetuating racism. It exposes the role that racism has in society and provides context for addressing changes to structural inequalities that are deep-seated in society. If we are to move beyond these travesties, unmasking racism is necessary, even if we feel guilt and shame about our roles in perpetuating inequities that hurt others. Though some are tired of being made to feel guilty, others are tired of seeing the continued effects of racism on their clients, themselves, and society. James Baldwin (1964), in his book Nothing Personal, states, “If a society permits one portion of its citizenry to be menaced or destroyed, then very soon, no one in that society is safe” (p. 26).

I admit being puzzled by individuals who insist on their right to preserve and memorialize monuments of enslavement for my people and yet insist that CRT is teaching hate. These are the contradictions that social work educators must be brave enough to discuss in the classroom. CRT allows this dialogue. Is it comfortable for everyone? No. But is it necessary? Yes. It is the discomfort that makes us self-aware enough to invest in change or at least understand why members of oppressed and marginalized communities do not embrace solutions that ignore past experiences and atrocities that are not erased by sympathy and rhetoric.

As social work educators, we are not called upon to simply teach what we believe in—we are called upon to maximize student exposure and understanding of the individuals they are being prepared to serve. CRT assists with this. When we examine social work through the lens of CRT, we should find opportunities to invest in new ways of serving that reckons with our past and presents and builds upon the promises of equity. The fact that we are not a postracial society should not blind us to the possibilities of becoming one. For those who are declaring not in my lifetime, I am reminded of the paraphrased quote about the necessity to plant trees that will provide shade that we will never enjoy. When the first Black president was elected in South Africa, people celebrated something that they never thought would happen in their lifetimes. The same was true when President Obama was elected as U.S. president. I am reminded of an interview I conducted with Dr. Dorothy Height shortly after President Obama was elected. She stated that she never expected a Black president in her lifetime, however she added “This is what I have been working for all of my life” (Crewe, 2009, p. 204).

As social work educators, our lifetime work should be about radical social justice, and CRT is one of the many tools to get us there. In fact, I believe that every social work student should be exposed to this theory to help with the change they are seeking in society. It is not enough to simply declare being antiracist. Becoming that requires an investment in understanding that racism is not just individual but systemic. Yes, you may not be a racist, but the system you work in most likely is. As stated by Crewe and Gourdine (2019, p. 1) in their article “Race and Social Policy: Confronting our Discomfort,” “… dialogue adds knowledge that in turn opens the opportunity for change.” If we declare ourselves as change agents, we must avail ourselves with all the tools—including CRT—that make some uncomfortable.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.