UPDATED: Glossary of CRT-Related Terms
Glossary of CRT-Related Terms
* This is an evolving document that may be subject to additions, revisions, and technical corrections based on feedback.
It is important to define the purpose and capabilities of this document before discussing the meaning of different terms used in the CRT debate.
Community awareness of Critical Race Theory (CRT), and of the fact that it is a discipline created by and for left-wing political activists that does not belong in schools, has skyrocketed in recent months. Though more parents have a working understanding of what CRT is, CRT as it manifests itself in schools, teacher trainings, curricula, etc., is not always easy to spot, mainly because it rarely identifies itself readily as “critical race theory”.
Critical Theory (CT), Critical Social Justice (CSJ), and Critical Race Theory at first glance look like nothing more than the study of things from a certain perspective. Many assume such theorizing only takes place in the upper echelons of academia. Indeed, many CRT proponents will argue that CRT is not in K-12, because it is something that is only studied in law school. This is misleading because Critical Social Justice, and related sub-fields like CRT, use a critical pedagogy that demands praxis of those theories—political activism in the name of the politics the theory teaches. However, this praxis is rarely called “Critical Race Theory” by name. A complex web of associated concepts and ideas are taught to weave together a two-track process: First, to convince students, parents, and teachers of many problems that simply are not so, and second, to push social changes that must be advanced in society to correct those perceived problems. This document shows how all of these ideas are related, which makes CRT easier to spot.
This guide is meant to help concerned citizens comb through curricula, public records communications, teacher trainings, etc., to establish more quickly whether or not any of these terms appear in the relevant context. Some of these terms can appear in ways that are completely acceptable, and even potentially in ways that should be encouraged. In other words, some of these terms have a typical, everyday life meaning that is unobjectionable, but often CRT redefines them so that they no longer mean the same thing. Put another way: some of these terms are everyday words that CRT redefines in order to use familiar language as a mask for fringe ideas. Some of these terms may seem unrelated to CRT, but they are still being used to advance left-wing ideas while others will almost always be presented in ways that are easy to establish as related to CRT. This document indicates whether terms are straight from CRT, are tangentially related to CSJ, or are unrelated in specific contexts. This glossary does not exhaustively provide all alternative contexts, just many of the most common instances. While searching materials for CRT, one should ensure that the context of the associated terms is related to CRT, or at least to other concepts of cultural Marxism.
This glossary is meant to be a reference guide, something to help citizens evaluate materials and assess whether the praxis (activist practice) of CRT is in effect.
The next section defines a few introductory concepts that help explain the rest of the document.
Critical Social Justice: Sometimes called “wokeness,” Critical Social Justice (CSJ) is, in fact, an ideology that aggressively pursues the social, cultural, institutional, and political installation and enforcement of a very specific and radical understanding of social justice derived from various “Critical Theories.” The view from Critical Social Justice:
Critical Social Justice is entirely focused on systemic power dynamics that it theorizes proceed according to factors relevant to group identity and sometimes identifies itself as being interested in “group rights” instead of individual rights. Its goal is to identify, expose, disrupt, dismantle, subvert, and overthrow those dynamics in a radical revolutionary process that seeks to remake “the system” itself in the name of its ideology. In more direct terms, CSJ advocates want a social and political revolution.
Critical Race Theory: A social theory that first gained traction in law schools during the 1980s, Critical Race Theory (CRT) takes the view that racism is baked into every aspect of American life. CRT teaches that every social structure (including churches, businesses, and family units) contains elements of racism, and that most, if not all, white Americans are racist. CRT further states that this racism is permanent and that it is, for all practical purposes, impossible to get rid of. Additionally, CRT claims that such things as merit, standards, testing, grading, and objectivity are skewed to make white people and white culture the standard by which all others are judged. In other words, CRT says that society defines these apparently neutral concepts in ways that elevate whiteness above all other races. CRT theorizes that racism is at the center of every area of American life and is operating subtly in every social interaction. According to CRT, almost nothing in America is free from racism.
Critical Pedagogy: A left-wing theory of education that claims all education is political and that the central role of education is to inculcate and indoctrinate children into political ideology. Practitioners do not say it quite that bluntly, but Critical Pedagogy absolutely says that the role of the teacher is, and should be, to help children develop a particular political understanding of the world. Developed by Paulo Freire in the 1980s, Critical Pedagogy is also, by its own admission, rooted in neo-Marxism.
Praxis: The transformation of subjectivity through the process of human action or labor upon an object. Simply put: practice, as distinguished from theory, which is to “do” or “act” upon something. CRT is a theory and the praxis of CRT is activism that seeks to spread the ideas of CRT. This activism is what generally appears in schools.
Ontological: Having to do with existence, or what it means to exist, and/or the relationship between concepts.
Abolitionist Teaching: Proponents of this method claim that this is the practice of pursuing educational freedom for all students, eschewing smaller reform in favor of total transformation of the student into an activist so that the student then goes and transforms society as a whole. In reality, this practice is connected to Critical Theory, Critical Pedagogy, and intersectional feminism. It describes itself as pursuing joy, direct action, and abolition. Bettina L. Love, who coined the term in her 2019 work, We Want to Do More Than Survive: Abolitionist Teaching and the Pursuit of Educational Freedom, defines abolitionist teaching as “teaching with the goal of intersectional social justice for equitable classrooms that love and affirm Black and brown children.”
Affirmation: According to Critical Social Justice, gender is an entirely social construct. That is, gender is simply a category that people made up. CSJ states that men and women are not objectively existing things, rather, they are social groups that were invented by people in order to sort society in a way which benefits straight heterosexual males.
For this reason CSJ advocates believe that there are no inherent differences between males and females. The view is that men and women are identical except for the genitals. There are no inherent personality differences or behavioral differences. The CSJ view is that men and women behave differently (for example men tend to be more aggressive) because society has socialized them to behave differently. Further, the CSJ movement thinks that both sex and gender are on a spectrum. There is no gender binary. From this view, when a doctor says that a baby is “a boy” or “a girl ” that doctor is not observing or noticing the sex of the baby, that doctor is assigning a social role to the baby on the basis of its genitals.
Because of this, the CSJ movement has adopted the view that one can change their gender. That is, if the doctor can assign you to one category, it is possible to be assigned to a different category. The CSJ view asserts that everyone has a right to pick their gender, and that includes the right to be treated like they are the gender they claim to be. That is, in order to accommodate their desire to be treated as the gender they claim they are, it is necessary for society and all of its members to affirm that a person is the gender they claim to be.
Using the right pronouns and treating the person in question like they really are the gender they have switched to (i.e. allowing them to use the women’s bathroom even if they have male genitals) is part of the affirmation process. It is not enough to leave the person alone and let them do what they want: you must actively affirm their decision and self-expression.
Anti-Bias Training: An approach to education, and adult-focused training, that proponents claim uses values-based principles and methodology in support of respecting and embracing differences and acting against bias and unfairness. Typically, anti-bias training accepts the doctrine of implicit bias and sees bias as systemic and baked into the fabric of liberalism itself. As such, anti-bias training often teaches people to “see” bias in things that would otherwise seem neutral and objective when viewed using Enlightenment-era reasoning. Anti-bias training often teaches people to look for and oppose bias in inappropriate ways defined through the Critical Social Justice lens. It is increasingly less likely that anti-bias trainings focus on teaching a distinct version of how to commit to challenging prejudice, stereotyping, and forms of discrimination without an infusion of Critical Social Justice ideas.
Anti-blackness: The name for the specific kind of racial prejudice directed toward black people. This can describe real prejudice as well as nonexistent but perceived prejudice, especially when seen through the same lens that anti-bias training uses when influenced by Critical Social Justice.
Anti-racism: The idea that society, in every aspect, is racist, and yet this concept prescribes sweeping new forms of racial discrimination as a means of addressing racism in society. If the previous sentence reads awkwardly, then you read it correctly. The purpose of anti-racism is to advance forms of racial and sexual discrimination if it is for the purposes of achieving equity for the percieved oppressed groups in our society. Anti-racism, as it is commonly used, almost always accepts the main tenets of Critical Race Theory and Critical Social Justice.
Centering: To place one particular group or set of interests at the “center” of the discourse. In every conversation, debate, or discourse there is a set of concepts, ideas, and interests deemed relevant and “central.” When discussing a given matter, stating that a particular idea, concern, interest, or concept is relevant or important is to “center” that thing in the discourse. This is usually seen as a negative, especially when “whiteness” is seen as being “centered,” because some argue that the act takes attention away from the experiences of others. This argument is often used to sidestep debate of a topic by categorically dismissing the views of the perceived dominant group. That categorical dismissal creates a dynamic where the opinions and perspectives of the “dominant” group are labeled as either inappropriate or morally inferior, often simply due to the color of one’s skin, although it is also often used to shut down the opinions of a group based on sex.
Colorism: Prejudice or discrimination against individuals with a dark skin tone, typically among people of the same ethnic or racial group. Colorism is related to, but slightly different than, racism. Racism is against a racial group, where colorism views skin color as a spectrum and is concerned with prejudice against people because of their specific skin tone. The term is usually used in contexts where a person who is not white expresses some view that is seen to “privilege” a lighter-skinned person of color over a darker-skinned person of color.
Conscious Bias: Attitudes about a particular group that people themselves are consciously aware of, even if those attitudes are outwardly invisible or difficult to detect by others. Identifying whether the claim of bias is actual bias or if it is manufactured bias through the lens of Critical Social Justice or Critical Race Theory is key to recognizing pernicious forms of this concept. Conscious Bias is an example of a concept that can be important and valid but can also be used for ideological reasons to unfairly and dishonestly attack those who have valid disagreements.
Critical ethnic studies: A discipline that analyzes colonial and racial projects that attempt to govern the relationship between people and land. The central focus is asking how the histories of colonialism and conquest, racial chattel slavery, white supremacist patriarchies, and heteronormativities affect society. This framework is usually looked at through the lens of Critical Social Justice and proponents claim that all the problems in society, and any inequality found in society, are the result of colonialism, racism, patriarchy, and “heteronormativity” (their name for the view that everyone is expected to be straight). Critical ethnic studies theorists often claim Western society is run by “whiteness” and as such they try to look at everything through the lens of other ethnic groups, so long as those ethnic groups act according to the “woke” version of that ethnic perspective.
Critical Pedagogy: Critical Pedagogy sees education as a being entirely political. Critical Pedagogy argues that the role of a teacher is to teach students to be radical activists and to teach them to view the world through the perspective of Critical Social Justice, which necessitates the infusion of social justice politics into every area of education. Practitioners believe that the entire classroom experience should be geared toward inculcating the ideology of “wokeness” into the students.
Critical Self-Awareness/ Self-Reflection: Critical Self-Reflection is the act of becoming aware of one’s presuppositions and challenging established patterns of thinking. However, this is done entirely in terms of challenging any thoughts or beliefs not sufficiently in line with Critical Social Justice. It is to observe the conditionings that shape beliefs, thoughts, and actions. Critical Self Awareness is to be critically aware of one’s own self—one’s actions, thoughts, and emotions in terms of Critical Social Justice. Typically, this involves learning to see how one, through actions and thoughts, contributes to patriarchy, white supremacy, homophobia, transphobia, and various other forms of systemic oppression.
Cultural Appropriation/Misappropriation: Proponents of this concept will argue that this is unacknowledged or inappropriate adoption of the customs, practices, ideas, etc. of one culture by members of another culture that is more dominant in society. The idea is that all cultural practices, including music, language, games, clothing, food, and others are property of the culture which produced them; anyone from a more powerful culture who uses cultural practices from another culture and becomes popular, or makes money, is generally seen to be stealing another group’s culture. Though there may be egregious examples that can often border on racist or prejudicial, this concept is often applied to the most innocuous displays of fashion, musical preference, hairstyle, etc.
Cultural Awareness/Competence/Proficiency: These three terms are a related set of ideas. The lines between these terms, and how they are used, are not always clear. However, these terms cluster around the sensitivity to the similarities and differences that exist between two different cultures and the use of this sensitivity in effective communication with members of another cultural group. Special attention is given to “power relations” to highlight which group is seen to be more powerful. The idea is to make sure the more powerful culture is deferential to the less powerful culture. Central to these concepts is having an awareness of one’s own cultural identity and specific views about differences from other identities and the ability to learn and build on the varying cultural and community norms of others. It is the ability to understand the within-group differences that make each student unique while celebrating the between-group variations. Again, the emphasis here is on which group is more powerful, which group is seen to be oppressing other groups, and any historical oppression between groups. Also, this way of thinking tends to assume that universal standards are expressions of cultural powers. For example, typical high-school grading would be thought of as setting up a “white” standard because giving people grades would only measure their ability to meet the white standard.
*There is a version of Cultural Awareness/Competence/Proficiency that is not “woke” and only seeks to ensure cultural differences are taken into account so no one is left out. The Critical Social Justice version is different because it requires people to “stick to their culture” and “stay in their lane.” The key difference is that in the Critical Social Justice version of this concept the focus is on making sure everyone is hyper-aware of their race. The Enlightenment-era way of thinking about this concept seeks to minimize the focus on race while seeking ways to bridge people towards unity, despite otherwise identified cultural boundaries.
Cultural Relevance: Teaching that uses the cultural knowledge, prior experiences, frames of reference, and performance styles of ethnically diverse students to make learning more relevant and effective. However, this way of thinking often assumes that everyone will be confined to the stereotypes of their perceived culture. It often appears to use such forms of stereotyping when deciding what is culturally relevant to a given student.
There is an acceptable way to use this term, and that is when the goal is to use cultural references that students are familiar with. That is, making sure all the examples and illustrations used in class are understood by everyone (i.e. not using farm analogies with city kids or not using aphorisms that students are unfamiliar with).
Culturally Responsive Teaching: A pedagogy whose advocates argue pushes the importance of including students’ cultural references in all aspects of learning because most current instruction is built around European cultural values. Teaching this way includes not just being aware of and respectful toward language differences, food preferences during lunch hour, music preferences in music class, and fashion that a student might wear but rather every aspect of the classroom experience. This means that even the standards that a student is judged by must be coherent with their culture. This often leads to wedges being driven between students based on various identities, attacking the idea of teaching children to unite within a shared American culture and identity from which common ground and unity can grow.
Cultural Responsiveness: This concept argues for the acknowledgement of the presence of culturally diverse students and the need for these students to find relevant connections among themselves, the subject matter, tasks, and their teachers. Proponents would argue that being culturally responsive is not limited to acknowledging ethnic holidays, including popular culture in the curriculum, or adopting colloquial speech. Being culturally responsive and culturally relevant requires cultural competency. This competency involves having an awareness of one’s own cultural identity and views about differences coupled with the ability to learn and build on the varying cultural and community norms of students and their families. This is usually influenced by how Critical Social Justice understands cultural interaction and special attention is paid to perceived differences in cultural power.
De-centering: De-centering is changing the focus of the debate. That is, de-centering is not so much about changing the terms on which the debate is had but changing whose concerns get to be central to the debate. This is the opposite of centering.
Diversity Training: From the Critical Social Justice perspective, this teaches people how to think of everything through the lens of systemic oppression and to see people first and foremost as avatars of their racial or cultural group. This type of diversity training seeks to encourage people to adopt the worldview of Critical Social Justice and to become activists for Critical Social Justice. This is, however, another example of a term that can mean two things. As a potentially positive and beneficial framework, diversity training would be geared toward teaching people how to be sensitive to the ways people can be different and interact differently. However, when CRT-style diversity training is implemented it almost always attempts to get people to see everything through the lens of race and to become activists for CRT.
Dominant Discourses: At any particular time, the “dominant discourse” is that which socially conditions people and socializes them into a particular way of thinking. The “dominant discourse” is also seen as the way in which certain ideas become powerful and elevate certain ideologies to become dominant in society. In practice, the idea contained in that discourse shapes the way a conversation or debate can go in a way that benefits the ideology that is embedded in the dominant discourse.
Educational Justice: A curriculum or program in which schools and communities work to provide equitable distribution of qualified teachers who can provide quality instruction, equitable access to educational resources, advanced courses, and a focus on restorative justice. However, the way “justice” is defined in this paradigm is through the lens of Critical Social Justice and this means the focus will be on ensuring equal outcomes. All solutions offered will be with an eye toward dealing with systemic oppression as Critical Social justice would define it. Educational Justice is seen as a means to end perceived educational inequity.
Equitable: According to a dictionary: being fair and impartial. Critical Social Justice proponents manipulate the concept of “equitable” as it relates to outcomes. They promote equal outcomes between groups, in which doing things equitably is to do them with an eye toward ensuring “equity,” which means ensuring equality of outcome. This worldview necessitates overt discrimination against all kinds of groups and categories of people, most often based on race.
Equity: Commonly understood to mean fairness or justice, the term is now used by left-wing activists to mean something much more specific: equality of outcomes between different racial groups and other minority groups, including through an endless process of identifying more and more minority groups via deconstruction. See: “Identity Deconstruction.” In order to “achieve” equity, the perceived barriers to equity must be removed. This requires formal efforts to review policies, procedures, practices, and systems to identify changes that need to be made. “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion,” “Anti-bias,” and “Anti-racist” trainings often serve as ways activists promote equity. Many school districts openly advocate for these processes as part of their long-term district “equity plan.”
Equity Gap: A specific term used when talking about “equity” that refers to a deficit that can be solved using “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” (DEI) programs, training, redistribution of resources, hiring practices, etc. There are many different ways of wording this concept, so “equity gap” is not the only way activists will try to convey this concept. To determine whether a discussion of equity gaps is related to CSJ and/or CRT, one must look at the context of the discussion.
Hegemony: A group that has hegemony sets the cultural and social agenda, has the most cultural power, and gets to embed their ideas, goals, values, and norms into the systems, methods, and institutions of culture and knowledge production.
Identity Deconstruction: To deconstruct one’s identity is to closely examine all the parts of one’s own view of oneself and to see how society has caused one to internalize particular ideas about oneself and to identify in a particular way. In this view, every aspect of one’s identity is arbitrary and can be changed at any time and in any way according to the whims of the person in question. Deconstruction seeks to make the cultural assumptions about how a person sees themselves obvious so that people can either accept or reject them. It also seeks to problematize any aspect of identity which is related to “whiteness” as Critical Social Justice sees it. As identity is further and further deconstructed, a never-ending combination of unique minority groups is then created and encouraged to wage a never-ending assault on the perceived oppressor class in society, which Critical Social Justice most often identifies as “whiteness.” In the more nefarious versions of this process, identity groups associated with the perceived oppressor class (e.g., white, male, able-bodied, and educated) are labeled negatively. Identity groups associated with the perceived oppressed class are labeled positively for no other reason than that they are associated with the perceived oppressed class.
Inclusivity Education: Traditionally, a way of teaching all children in the same classrooms, in the same schools. That meant real learning opportunities for groups who were traditionally excluded–not only children with disabilities but speakers of minority languages too. However, through the Critical Social Justice lens, inclusivity education refers to making sure that nothing is said or done that might offend someone. Typically, this involves claiming that any idea at odds with Critical Social Justice is non-inclusive and therefore not allowed.
Institutional Bias: Practices, scripts, or procedures that work systematically to give advantage to certain groups or agendas over others. Institutionalized bias is built into the fabric of institutions. In Critical Social Justice, such things as “hiring the best person” or “merit-based evaluation” are thought to be institutionally biased on the grounds that the standard of what constitutes best, or what counts as “merit,” is rigged to give straight, white males an advantage.
Institutional Oppression: This refers to the mistreatment of people within a social identity group, supported and enforced by institutions, solely based on the person’s membership in the social identity group. When used in CRT, oppression is usually said to be any place where there are any unequal outcomes at all.
Internalized Racism: If, within a society that is called systemically racist, there is a racial group, or individuals within that racial group, who are oppressed but who still support the supremacy and dominance of the groups oppressing them, that can be referred to as “internalized racism.” The group’s willingness to maintain or participate in the set of attitudes, behaviors, social structures, and ideologies that undergird the dominating group’s power is used as evidence of this internalization. Accusations of internalized racism are often used to shut down any disagreement with Critical Social Justice efforts by those who are, in theory, part of the oppressed group.
Internalized White Supremacy: This is the same as internalized racism but specifically with white supremacist thoughts, ideas, and attitudes.
Interrupting Racism: This is the act of using the methods and techniques of Critical Social Justice to intervene in a situation where it is claimed that racism is occuring.
Intersectionality: Proponents see this as the interconnected nature of traits they consider to be social categorizations (as opposed to the immutable nature of characteristics or traits) such as race, class, ability, and gender as they apply to a given individual or group, regarded as creating overlapping and interdependent systems of discrimination or disadvantage. The term was coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw.
Intersectional Identities: Any identity that is the composite of two or more identities that are perceived as marginalized. These ever-expanding intersectional identities are the groups around which Critical Social Justice constructs its arguments against perceived prevailing systems of oppression and those identity groups that are seen as oppressors. Through this lens, individuals are seen and defined by their identities (many of which are immutable traits) and are expected to hold to the prevailing political worldview that is expected of them by the far Left. Individuality and freedom of thought are cast aside in favor of mandating the expected group worldview if such individuality and freedom of thought conflicts with the aims of Critical Social Justice.
Intersectional Studies: The study of the ways that race, gender, disability, sexuality, class, age, and other social categories are mutually shaped and interrelated through forces such as colonialism, neoliberalism, geopolitics, and cultural configurations to produce shifting relations of power and oppression.
Marginalized Identities: A group, or an individual identity that is perceived to be excluded, ignored, or relegated to the outer edge of a group/society/community.
Marginalized/Minoritized/Under-represented Communities: Communities composed of people with marginalized identities who are seen to have less opportunity than the dominant white majority.
Microaggressions: The everyday verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs, or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to target persons based solely upon their marginalized group membership. Critical Social Justice continuously pushes the boundaries of what might constitute a microaggression and thus a “hostile” act, often in tedious and inappropriate ways.
Multiculturalism: The practice of acknowledging and respecting the various cultures, religions, races, ethnicities, attitudes, and opinions within an environment. Multiculturalism is often pushed as ideal, while those who want to elevate the importance of a shared identity and common culture within a given nation for the purposes of stability and unity are discounted as racist. Multiculturalism is often presented as an end in itself by Critical Social Justice proponents, who do not acknowledge any downside to having multiple cultures in a single space (for example, they would ignore or downplay the significance of language barriers).
Neo-segregation: A new form of racial segregation—often called “racial affinity groups” or “racial caucuses”—with separate meetings, facilities, living quarters, and training programs for whites and racial minorities. The assumption is that whites must “do the work” to address their “internalized racial superiority” and racial minorities must be protected from invasive “whiteness.”
Oppressor vs. Oppressed: A systemic social dynamic based on perceived and real differences among social groups involving ideological domination, institutional control, and the promulgation of the oppressor’s ideology, logic system, and culture to the oppressed group. This term may refer to any dynamic where one group systematically oppresses another group. The Frankfurt School and early practitioners of Critical Theory first used the classic Marxist conception of conflict through the lens of the bourgeoisie and the proletariat (an economic class dynamic of poor vs. rich). CSJ and CRT replaced that older conception of social conflict and replaced it with the newer oppressor vs. oppressed language that both allowed for classic economic class conflict debates, but also through the categorizations of race, sex, etc.
Patriarchy: A social system in which men dominate, in which men are regarded as the authority within the family and society, in which power and possessions are passed on from father to son, and in which men have more power, prestige, and opportunity in society.
Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports (PBIS): A tiered framework which many school districts use in place of discipline. PBIS.org defines PBIS as “an evidence-based three-tiered framework for improving and integrating all of the data, systems, and practices affecting student outcomes every day. It is a way to support everyone – especially students with disabilities – to create the kinds of schools where all students are successful.” https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.pbis.org/pbis/getting-started&sa=D&source=docs&ust=1647353744094642&usg=AOvVaw01kUi4FnFkBTNFGYu7m0Ey
Like so many frameworks in education, the PBIS framework is serving as a mode for embedding concepts of critical theory and social justice. PBIS.org suggests tens of thousands use the program. PBIS.org also says:
“School behavior support systems can serve to perpetuate oppression or be a force for dismantling systemic racism and promoting equity. At the Center on PBIS, we are committed to improving outcomes for each student, and given centuries of oppression, violence, and segregation, we must increase our commitment to improving outcomes for each Black student. To dismantle systemic racism, we must:
The Center on PBIS is committed to partnering with the Black community and providing resources to help educators make Black lives matter.”
Privilege: Describes benefits that belong to people because they fit into a specific social group or have certain dimensions to their identity. One can have (or lack) privilege because of one’s race, gender, sexual orientation, ability, religion, wealth, and class among many other characteristics. According to CRT, privilege and the lack of privilege are how power is distributed.
Race Essentialism: A belief in an essence that defines all members of a racial category. The practice of categorizing a racial group based on an artificial social construction that imparts an “essence” for that group, homogenizing the group and removing individuality and difference. Critical Race Theory claims to be against essentialism, but in practice they treat members of racial groups as monoliths who all hold (or ought to hold) the same views.
Racial Healing: Racial healing is a practice that has as its goal to heal the psychological damage caused by racism and to advance racial equity.
Racialized Identity: Racial identity is said to be externally imposed. If one thinks of oneself as an American, that is not a racialized identity. If one thinks of oneself as “black,” that is a racialized identity that has been formulated by society to mean something specific. Although CRT practitioners typically argue the importance of race and identity, in this case, racialized identity is seen as a negative because it involves the imposed identity on that group by “others.” CRT proponents argue that only white people are afforded the opportunity to have non-racialized identities, which is seen as another sign of systemic oppression. Of course, this CRT argument itself is an attempt to impose a racial identity. By pointing out that someone might not have a racialized identity, CRT activists can then racialize that person’s identity. The inability of racial groups that CRT proponents label as oppressed to define their own identities is seen as more evidence of systemic racism.
Racial Justice: The systematic fair treatment of people of all races, resulting in equitable opportunities and outcomes for all. Racial justice—or racial equity—goes beyond “anti-racism.” It is not just the absence of discrimination and inequities but also the presence of deliberate systems and support to achieve and sustain racial equity through proactive and preventative measures.
Racial Prejudice: Bigotry against a person or group because of their race. CSJ and CRT advocates will often employ this argument inappropriately, when no racial prejudice has occurred. The context of the usage of this term will dictate whether it is valid or invalid.
Representation: The method of authentically bringing traditionally excluded individuals and/or groups into processes, activities, and decision/policymaking in a way that shares power. Representation can be such things as electing people from a particular group or making sure someone from a particular identity group is among the cast of characters in a movie. In Critical Social Justice/CRT the goal is to bring in the “woke” version of whatever group is to be represented. So, electing a conservative black person is bad, but electing a “woke” black person is good.
Restorative Circles: Restorative Circles are seen as part of supporting students’ social and emotional learning. From the link below, one of the points of Restorative Circles is as follows:
“Zoom out to promote understanding on the systems level: Explore whether there are larger systemic forces that underlie the challenges students have touched on (such as racism, sexism, or lack of access to resources). Introduce information, stories, and voices that might shed light on how these systems operate. Look for examples of people who took action to interrupt these and other oppressive systems.
Invite students to connect to this information by sharing their thoughts, feelings, and related experiences.
Studying larger, systemic forces in society can help students better understand their situation, and can be a useful starting point for students to become more active themselves. Action and activism can inspire hope, connection, and healing.” https://www.edutopia.org/article/building-community-restorative-circles
Restorative Justice: There is a specific meaning to this term as it applies to criminal justice. As it applies to schools, according to the Manhattan Institute, “there is confusion about what [restorative justice] is and no consensus about the best way to implement it. However, proposed approaches include individual or community “conferences” in which the injured party can address the harms done; peer mediation or “peer juries” by which students resolve disputes themselves; and the use of “socio-emotional learning” techniques to encourage the healthy management of emotion.” It is also seen as the act of emphasizing individual and collective accountability for perceived social injustices in a way that undoes the harm of the wrongs in question. Restorative Justice seeks to make up for past wrongs. It is key to pay attention and monitor the appropriateness of what is being claimed as a past wrong, and whether the proposed solutions themselves are also appropriate.
Social-Emotional-Learning: Technically speaking, Social-Emotional Learning (SEL) is not a part of Critical Race Theory. It is the process of developing the self-awareness, self-control, and interpersonal skills that are vital for school, work, and life success. People with strong social-emotional skills are better able to cope with everyday challenges and benefit academically, professionally, and socially. However, concepts of social justice and CRT are often being infused into SEL lessons and curricula because activists want to use the “social” focus of SEL to teach the CRT view of how social interactions work. As such, SEL is used to teach people how to interpret the people around them, how to think about society, and then intentionally how to behave socially the way CRT says they should. While it is possible to have SEL components included in schools in an innocuous form, the reality is that, today, most SEL programs have been perverted by Critical Social Justice advocates to do more harm than good. It is important to be aware of the fact that CRT activists, as well as some teachers, counselors, school psychologists, and vendors of SEL programs are embedding their CRT view of how society works into the “social” aspects of Social Emotional Learning.
Spirit Murdering: A metaphor for the idea that racism is more than just physical pain, racism robs people of color of their humanity and dignity and leaves personal, psychological, and spiritual injuries. It is the disregard of the humanity of people whose quality of life requires one’s regard. Disregarding someone’s humanity in that context is to murder them spiritually.
Structural Bias: Refers to the institutional patterns and practices that confer advantages to some and disadvantages to others based on identity. It is not merely the institutions themselves but the way that institutions are structured and relate to each other and society.
Systemic Racism: The normalization and legitimization of an array of dynamics–historical, cultural, institutional, and interpersonal–that routinely advantage white people while producing cumulative and chronic adverse outcomes for people of color. Systemic racism encompasses the entire system of white domination, diffused and infused in all aspects of society, including its history, culture, politics, economics, and entire social fabric.
This term is sometimes used interchangeably with the term “structural racism.”
Systemic Bias: A social phenomenon based on the perceived and real differences among social groups that involves ideological domination, institutional control, and the promulgation of the oppressor’s ideology, logic system, and culture.
Systemic Oppression: Conscious and unconscious, non-random, and organized harassment, discrimination, exploitation, prejudice, and other forms of unequal treatment that impact different groups.
Systems of Power and Oppression: When prejudice and institutional power combine to create a system that discriminates against some groups and benefits other groups. The systems here are social systems, but the definition of system is expansive and includes every social phenomenon, including institutions, language, education, healthcare, culture, infrastructure, entertainment, government, family structure, the economy, and any other widespread social phenomena. In the view of Critical Social Justice advocates, there is nothing that is not the product of interlocking social systems. Examining them is to examine them for racism, sexism, patriarchy, white supremacy, bias, bigotry, or anything else that they think leads to inequality.
Transformative: The dictionary definition of transformative is “causing or able to cause an important and lasting change in someone or something.”As such, we typically think of transformative as the changing of one thing to another in a meaningful, lasting and important way.
In the Critical Social Justice (Woke) worldview, the term “transformative” is used to refer not just to any sort of meaningful and lasting change, but a very specific type of meaningful and lasting change.
The CSJ movement thinks that to compromise on any view, policy, law, rule, idea, or state of affairs that is not fully in accordance with CSJ is to be complicit in a grave moral evil. As such, they believe that in order for any change to count, that is, to be significant or meaningful, it must be fully in line with the CSJ worldview.
The CSJ movement sees our small “L” liberal demacracy as being a racist, sexist, bigoted, transphobic, and capitalist patriarchy. As such, every aspect of our society needs to be changed so that it is brought in line with CSJ ideology. Any change that is not fully in line with CSJ ideology is thought to be complicit with the evil sexist, racist, transphobic, capitalist patriarchy and therefore useless and insignificant. In other words, there is no room for compromise.
So when a CSJ activist says they want a change that is transformative, what they mean is they are demanding a change that is fully in line with CSJ ideology and does not compromise in any way with the ideas of conservatives, centrists, or moderates.
Unconscious/Implicit/Explicit Bias: An inclination or preference either for or against an individual or group that interferes with impartial judgment. All forms of bias can be both explicit (aware, voluntary, and intentional) and implicit (unaware, involuntary, and unintentional), though explicit biases are more overt expressions of prejudice or hate. All manifestations of bias and discrimination can be both personal (an individual act of bias, meanness, or exclusion) or institutional (supported and sanctioned by power and authority that confers privilege on members of a dominant group while disadvantaging members of other groups). Through the lens of Critical Social Justice, many things get labeled as bias which are not really instances of bias.
White Fragility: The idea that if a white person rejects or pushes back against an accusation of racism, rather than engaging in deep introspection and self-examination, they are doing that because they are “fragile” and cannot handle the truth about their racism. The idea here is that being upset because someone labels one a racist, or said one is a bigot, then the person so-labeled just can’t handle the truth and is lashing out. This concept is often weaponized against anyone who rightly rejects false accusations of racism. “White fragility” is often used as a blunt method of stopping debate so that accusations of racism do not actually have to be proven and so that disagreement with such accusations is set up to be yet another form of racism. This is a catch-22 proposition in many cases, deliberately put in place by “woke” Left social justice activists.
White Privilege: The unquestioned and unearned set of advantages, entitlements, benefits, and choices bestowed on people solely because they are white. Generally, white people who experience such privilege do so without being conscious of it.
White Supremacy: A historically based, institutionally perpetuated system of exploitation and oppression of continents, nations, and peoples of color by white peoples and nations of the European continent for the purpose of establishing, maintaining, and defending a system of wealth, power and privilege.
CRT advocates have expanded the meaning of this term to include anything that they think is even marginally related to anything that anyone anywhere might think has a possible racist implication.
Whiteness: The processes and practices including basic rights, values, beliefs, perspectives, and experiences purported to be commonly shared by all but which are actually only consistently afforded to white people. CRT activists see whiteness as a dynamic operating at all times and on myriad levels.
Woke: The act of being aware of and actively attentive to systems of power, especially as it concerns issues of racial and social justice.
Sign up to receive the latest from Center for Renewing America and Citizens for Renewing America