[music]

Brian Lehrer: This is the Brian Lehrer show on WNYC FM HD and AM New York, WNJT-FM 88.1 Trenton, WNJP 88.5 Sussex, WNJY 89.3 Netcog, and WNJO 90.3 Toms River. We are New York and New Jersey public radio at 11:01. Now critical race theory 101. Some states are banning its teaching, some politicians are running against it to win election, people are lining up pro or con without knowing much at all about what it really is.

We're going to try to help remedy that and we're very happy to have with us for the next half hour Ibram X. Kendi, director of the Boston University Center for Antiracist Research, author of the books How to Be an Antiracist and Stamped from the Beginning: The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America. He's also a contributing writer for The Atlantic where he has an article this month called There is no Debate over Critical Race Theory. Pundits and politicians have created their own definitions for the term and then set about attacking it. Professor Kendi is always great to have you on Welcome back to WNYC.

Professor Kendi: Oh, it's always great, Brian, to be on the show.

Brian: Early in your article, you cite a fairly simple definition of critical race theory from Kimberle Crenshaw, who help coin the term. Would you start there for critical race theory 101 with a top-line definition?

Professor Kendi: Sure. Professor Crenshaw defines critical race theory as a way of looking at the laws role in platforming, facilitating, producing, and even insulating racial inequality in our country.

Brian: People may be surprised to hear the beginning of what you just said that it's a theory that comes from the law. It's a legal theory, it's not a theory about human nature, or good races and bad races or the education of children or anything like that. Can you talk about its grounding in the law?

Professor Kendi: Sure. You had largely legal scholars, particularly in the 1970s and early 1980s, recognizing that despite newly instituted civil rights laws from the 1960s, in particular, racial inequality persisted. These legal scholars created a theory and really a way of looking to begin to understand how and why racial inequality persisted in this post-civil rights period.

Brian: One example from the law, I think, and you can expound on this or correct if necessary, is the classic book from 1998 that's often named as coming from a critical race theory perspective, Words That Wound by Kimberle Crenshaw, Mari Matsuda, Charles Lawrence, and Richard Delgado, which the Barnes and Noble website describes as a critical race theory critique of First Amendment orthodoxy that says only racism can explain why free speech rights do not include defamation, invasion of privacy and fraud, those are not protected by the First Amendment, but injurious hate speech, words that wound, are protected.

If that's an argument for hate speech laws, is that a good example of critical race theory in its original context?

Professor Kendi: I think what it's important for people to understand and I think what critical race theorists were the first to recognize is that despite particularly many conservative Americans, framing certain laws, First Amendment, even newly instituted laws as race-neutral because they did not have any racial language in them. That indeed, these laws had a racial impact, had an impact that ultimately led to the reinforcement of racist structures in this country.

Critical race theorists are keen on really examining the way the law reinforces the structures of racism and white supremacy and they're less concerned about what some call interpersonal racism or what individual people are doing.

Brian: Systemic racism, in the guise of neutral language. That actually makes me think of the ruling that the Supreme Court just made on the Arizona voting rights law in which it was okay if it had a disparate impact by race if the law didn't explicitly say, Black people can vote here or Black people can vote there. Is that an example of how to look at something through a critical race theory lens that might on the surface appear neutral?

Professor Kendi: Well, yes, and I think, in many ways, critical race theorists, at the time of its emergence in the 1970s, began to push back against this idea that we should not judge a policy as racist based on its outcome, that we should judge it as racist based on the intent of the policymaker, even the language within the actual policy. What that's allowed for is all these laws in the books that courts that can be proven to be leading to racial disparities, that you have courts in this case, including the Supreme Court, somehow imagining as not racist, because they put the goalpost as intent, which is unbelievably hard to prove as opposed to outcome.

Brian: Can you break down the words in the term critical race theory? What does the word critical mean in this context, and what does the word theory mean?

Professor Kendi: First, I think that it is important for us to take a critical look at why and again, this is what critical race theorists were doing as to why racial inequality is persisting in this country. They decided to take a critical look at the law. The theory was not that they'll say there's something wrong or inferior about Black people and that's why the racial wealth gap is persisting in the '70s and '80s, there must be something going on with our laws. Let's take a critical look at those laws as opposed to continuing to demonize and degrade particular peoples of color.

Brian: Listeners, we can take your phone calls. It's critical race theory 101 with Ibram X. Kendi from Boston University, and we can take questions from the class, that's you. 646-435-7280, your questions about critical race theory, that approach to the law, and other things that's being misapplied as a buzzword in politics these days, as we get to know at least a little more about what it really is.

The goal here is to avoid the polarized debate and aim for understanding then you can form whatever opinions you come to with greater knowledge. 646-435-7280, your critical race theory 101 questions for Ibram X. Kendi. 646-435-7280 or tweet your question at Brian Lehrer. As it pertains to teaching, which is where it seems to be such a flashpoint, Professor Kendi, Education Week had an article in May called Critical Race Theory Isn't a Curriculum. It's a Practice, an approach or a lens through which an educator can help students examine the role of race and racism in American society. Is that distinction between critical race theory as a curriculum versus a practice or an approach, a distinction that you understand or think is important?

Professor Kendi: I think even taking it even more of a step back. We talked about our critical race theory as largely emerging in law schools, and largely created by legal scholars, and it's largely taught in law schools today. It's very sophisticated and it's very difficult to begin to understand how inequality is persisting as a result of law that does not have any racial language in it. I think that's why critical race theory is largely taught in law schools. It's not taught in schools, and indeed a recent Reuters Ipsos poll found that 57% of adults aren't necessarily aware about what CRT or critical race theory is, and then among  those who claim that they did or do know what it is, only 5% of them actually answered correctly questions on what critical race theory was. We have this large number of people who are posing what they think is critical race theory but it's actually not.

Brian: Let's take a phone call. Frank in Randolph, New Jersey, you're on WNYC with Ibram X. Kendi. Hi, Frank.

Frank: Hi, my question is, why is it even called a theory? Because a theory suggests that it may not be real, it's just a theory, we're working on it, we don't have the information. Why isn't it called something like racial integration with laws in this country so it's something more descriptive?

Professor Kendi: Well, I can't really speak to how and why the term was coined in that way but I think what I can speak to is how and why those who are seeking to really roll back the teaching about racism and about slavery in schools, decided that they were going to really take the term critical race theory, and then pack it with meaning and then attack it. People are going, "Whoa, this is a theory that white people are inherently evil." That's what these critics of critical race theory are saying even though that's actually not what critical race theorists are concerned about.

Brian: Let's get into that a little bit because I think that's central to the critiques that people hear of critical race theory. In your Atlantic article, you set out to bust some myths about critical race theory and name some things that it is not. One of those is a quote from Senator Ted Cruz, who said, "Critical race theory says every white person is a racist." Can you take that one on, because versions of that come up a lot in the media?

Professor Kendi: Again, critical race theorists are concerned about the law, they're concerned about structures. They're not necessarily concerned about people and so anyone who understands critical race theory will know that that's flatly not the case. What I think is important for us to know is that these so-called critics of critical race theory have described me as the father of critical race theory even though critical race theory was born in the 1970s, and potentially 1981, and I was born in 1982 and I write on anti-racism.

There's this long-standing white supremacist talking point that anti-racism is code for anti-white. What they're really trying to do is mainstream this old white supremacist talking point about any of us who are criticizing the structures of racism and those who are upholding those structures are not doing that, what we're actually attacking is white people.

Brian: Which you're not. Another critique you take on related is aimed at The New York Times series, The 1619 Project as a lens through which to view things about American history. You quote a Trump executive order from when he was president that says, "Despite the virtues and accomplishments of this nation, many students are now taught to hate their own country and to believe that the men and women who built it were not heroes, but rather villains." From Trump. Should we think of The 1619 Project as coming from critical race theory? If so, how would you describe its goals in that respect compared to how Trump refer to it?

Professor Kendi: I think what I tried to really show in that piece is for people to understand the many different elements that were stuffed into this flawed frame or definition that they called critical race theory. That is Black Lives Matter demonstrators, that's cancel culture, that's The 1619 Project, that's American history, that's also anti-racism. For these critics, they imagine that young people should only be taught in schools what is going to make them love this country. Anything that's truthful that could cause them to have a critical look at their nation, they imagine is something that somehow should not be taught in schools.

They imagine if we teach about slavery then that means we're going to teach about supposedly white people being evil. When we teach about slavery, we teach about the interracial group of Americans, which included white people who actually fought against slavery. You can have a white child who can learn about a white slaveholder and a white abolitionist, and I would hope that that white child would decide to identify more so with the white abolitionist.

Brian: That idea of being taught to hate their own country suggests the emotional side of the impact of critical race theory that I think is also a flashpoint. The critics like Trump say, "Critical race theory teaches people to feel badly about the United States or teaches white people that they have to see themselves as bad people because they're white or feel guilty because they're white or assume they have racist feelings because they're white." People cite Robin DiAngelo's book White Fragility as one example saying, "This is about making white people feel a necessary discomfort on emotional state." What would you say about the emotional impact a critical race theory lens is supposed to produce in white people or anyone else if that's even a thing because maybe there is a there.

We've had George Yancey on the show, you probably know him, who wrote his letter to white America, among other things where he said, "Well, because I'm a man raised in a society that's structurally sexist, I benefit from sexism and I have to look at sexist assumptions that I have because I'm a man." He applies the same thing to people who grow up white in a country where so much of the structure was to advantage white people. Where would you enter that as something that critical race theory is intended to produce as a personal or emotional response in this cultural context?

Professor Kendi: Wow. I think within critical race theories, I should say in a broader sense among us scholars and writers who write on race and racism in a critical fashion, there are actually many disagreements on this point. I don't want to speak as if my thoughts are representative of everyone else's but what I can say is what I write about and I think specifically as it relates to white people. I think it's important for white Americans, particularly low and middle-income white Americans, to recognize how they benefit from racist policies. At the same time, and a more egalitarian, equitable, and just country would actually be even better for them than racism itself.

For them to see that duality, for them to see that there's going to be Black, brown, and Indigenous people who it's going to be harder for them to vote but there's going to be white Republicans who are going to struggle to vote as a result of this wave of voter suppression policies. There's going to be white liberals who usually ally, let's say, with people of color, and when those people of color their voting rights are suppressed, it suppresses the political power of white liberals.

For people to get a more nuanced understanding, particularly white Americans, and for them to see the ways in which they sometimes can be manipulated by racist ideas, they can be led to believe that Trump is trying to help them when any objective analysis of his policies have had a detrimental effect on us all.

Brian: Talib in Parsippany, you're on WNYC with Ibram X. Kendi. Talib, thanks for calling in. Hi.

Talib: Hi, Brian. How are you doing? I'm a longtime listener. My question is, I was exposed to critical race theory in law school [inaudible 00:19:40] and people like Mari Matsuda and Derrick Bell. I always thought of critical race theory as coming out of the deconstructionism, coming out of the reader, and postmodernism and I thought it was like an application of deconstructionism and postmodernism to the racial question here in United States.

That's how I always thought of in my head. That's accurate or am I way off?

Brian: Professor Kendi, you got the question?

Professor Kendi: I actually think it may be better to ask one of those critical race theorists, particularly one of the pioneers. Obviously, Derrick isn't around, but Mari Matsuda and Kim Crenshaw, because I think it's one thing to know the theory, it's another thing to know its-- so its intellectual traditions, and I don't want to speak wrong.

Brian: Talib, thank you. Andy, in Brooklyn, you're on WNYC. Hi, Andy.

Andy: Hey, Brian, thanks for having me. Professor Kendi, I love your work. I'm a rabbi, I'm Jewish, guess I'm white. I'm a super proud American. I wear my 1619 hat around the neighborhood that I got from [unintelligible 00:20:58] store. I guess I want to just add a layer, as an American Jew, I don't keep a Christian calendar. I live on a different timeframe. I share in the overall American calendar and I think I always use it as an example with my own kids about the way in which America has many different approaches to history and many different levels of understanding and I try to be a voice out there in the community that tamps down some of this hysteria that's out there.

There's nothing wrong with thinking critically about our history and knowing the full story, it's the only way that we've ever made progress. You're totally right to point out Frederick Douglass and John Brown and many others worked in multiracial coalition to bring justice to this world. Just keep at it and don't let the bastards get you down, as they say, and we'll get better for a just country. Thanks again.

Professor Kendi: I'm happy you mentioned this because I think that what we should all be seeking to build is a multiracial, multicultural, multi-ethnic, multi-religious society and democracy where all those races, cultures, religions, and ethnic groups are respected equally. While some Americans will celebrate Christmas, I would celebrate, as I did growing up in Jamaica, Queens, our Christmas, and Kwanzaa as an African-American, and there was nothing wrong with that and we appreciate everyone's cultural traditions.

Brian: Andy, thanks for that call. Your colleague at The Atlantic, Conor Friedersdorf, points to some examples where he thinks people have crossed the line in education, though these are rare. He cites materials for kindergarten in one school district that tells the kid's whiteness is akin to signing a contract with the devil. Assuming that's accurate, do you think critical race theory is sometimes applied to education in ways that go too far that give the critics ammunition that they shouldn't have to paint with a broad brush?

Professor Kendi: First, that form of teaching isn't critical race theory and I think that we cannot go on a search to see the ways in which when we do teach about, let's say whiteness or white privilege, or anti-white racism, we come across ways like that one that is just simply appalling and then make the case that we shouldn't be teaching about these topics in schools. Can you imagine anything like that, Brian, in which we find those rare cases of the worst ways in which it's being taught, and then we use that to make a case that overall it's a problem?

Anything is going to have its excesses, but the vast majority of teachers who teach on race and about racism and even whiteness in schools are actually not, what they're teaching is things to a five-year-old child who by five years old, our kids are already connecting race to behavior, and they're teaching that white boy, you're special when you're kind, you're special when you're reflective, you're special when you share, but you're not special because of the color of your skin.

Brian: Shahid Comrade in Brooklyn, you're on WNYC. Hello, Shahid Comrade.

Shahid Comrade: Hi. Brian, morning. I'm Shahid Comrade, Secretary-General Pakistan-USA Freedom Forum. Brian, let me be honest with you, I salute you and [unintelligible 00:25:08]. Yes, we barely need this kind of talk. Only one thing I want to add, but let's start from the zero point in this that we are human, and if we honestly want to serve the country and serve the world, let's face the problem and accept the problem. Yes, Europe and the West, and America at this moment have more knowledge, more power, more brain, more professors, so what we can do, I think it's better that we have open talk like we are doing at this moment and not denying the [unintelligible 00:25:49].

If we are defeated in Afghanistan, let's face it, yes. It's not defeated of the citizen of this country, it's a defeated of the government's bad policies. Yes, we have a race problem but emotions basically always protect your interest against other group with other people. That's why I promote that without any emotion, listen to others as a human, as a respective way. This problem that we have in this country, when the money is as a vote, as a Supreme Court rule, so we have to do some things changing better [unintelligible 00:26:33]. I think the best start is this, that I have to love you as a human first, then the color come, then your groups come, rich and [unintelligible 00:26:41], knowledgeable and not knowledgeable but we have no respect as a human to others, same in the national and internationally.

We don't respect the weaker nations, United Nation members, because we have a [unintelligible 00:26:55], we have bombs. We have a good brains in this country, one of the best brains in this world but does not give us a chance to rule against the humanity. That's a simple thing I want to say this country need and lead to open thought without any emotions, not the emotions after 9/11 because then somebody has to prove that his IQ was so low, but he just want to prove that he's a good leadership. Emotions [unintelligible 00:27:25].

Brian: Shahid, thank you very much for your call. We're just about out of time. Professor Kendi, is there anything on the way out the door that you want to say either to the last caller or just, I don't know, you can give people a reading list if we've done critical race theory 101 here and just scratch the surface, suggested further reading or anything else you want to say to wrap it up?

Professor Kendi: Well, I would encourage everyone to read the book, Critical Race Theory: An Introduction, if you're curious to learn about the book, I should say about critical race theory. There's also another book called, Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings that Formed the Movement.

I would not take the definitions of the so-called critics of critical race theory at face value but I think very quickly, Brian, to the last caller's point, one of the reasons why people are saying that critical race theory teaches that certain children are inherently bad people because of the color of your skin is because that's going to heighten the emotions of their parents, and then we're not going to be able to have a dialogue and then we'll be screaming at each other, when indeed, there's a knowledge that that will make people angry, which is why CRT is being defined in that way, as opposed to being defined for what it actually means, which then allows us to have an actual more reasoned debate and dialogue.

Brian: With that, we are out of time. We could go so much further and deeper, but it's just one segment on a radio show. Critical race theory 101 is all we frame this as being and on we go from here on this show and elsewhere. We thank our guests Ibram X. Kendi, Director of the Boston University Center for Antiracist Research, author of the books, How to be an Antiracist and Stamped From the Beginning: The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America. He's also a contributing writer for The Atlantic where he has an article this month called There is no Debate Over Critical Race Theory. Pundits and politicians have created their own definitions for the term and then set about attacking it. Professor Kendi, thanks so much for doing this with us.

Professor Kendi: You're welcome. Thank you, Brian, for having me on.

Copyright © 2021 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.