Quantcast
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 343

About Critical Race Theory

Yesterday morning, my wife came upstairs and told me that NPR had a story about taxes. She also mentioned that it would probably annoy me. (She gets me.) But I decided to turn it on just to see who would be guesting.

One of the guests was Professor Dorothy Brown. Prof. Brown is a friend and a mentor, so I left it on and I’m glad I did. The episode of 1A focused on the racial wealth gap and, to my interests, the place of the federal income tax in causing and exacerbating the wealth gap.

That the tax law treats Black and white taxpayers different isn’t immediately obvious. After all, it’s written in race-neutral language (or, better, it doesn’t mention race at all). And, in fact, it has taken at least two decades of pioneering work by Prof. Brown (and others) to highlight the ways in which the tax law, while facially neutral, has a disparate impact that benefits white taxpayers and harms Black and brown taxpayers.[fn1]

Figuring out ways in which the tax law affects Black taxpayers differently from the ways it affects white taxpayers is no easy task, though. Among other things, the IRS doesn’t collect taxpayers’ races. So Prof. Brown’s research truly requires detective work.

As I listened to Prof. Brown on NPR, I thought about Utah’s H.R. 901. H.R. 901 is a resolution recently passed by the Utah house claiming that

some concepts contained in critical race theory degrade important societal values and, if introduced in classrooms, would harm students’ learning in the public education system

The resolution goes on to recommend that the state board of education enact rules to prevent certain race-based ideas (ideas that the resolution asserts are parts of critical race theory) from being taught in public schools or taught to public school teachers. With this resolution, Utah joins a chorus of states attempting to ban critical race theory from grade school curricula.

Now this resolution would be laughable for a couple reasons. The first is, I can almost guarantee that the only public school in Utah with explicit instruction in critical race theory is the S.J. Quinney College of Law. Critical race theory, after all, is a legal theory. I would be shocked if grade schools in Utah were teaching, say, legal realism or legal positivism or feminist legal theory or, honestly, any other legal philosophy. Why? Because that’s not really what grade school is about.

Same with critical race theory. And what is critical race theory? I’m not going to be able to give a definitive answer, in part because I’m not primarily a critical race theorist and in part because there’s no simple, and probably no single, answer to that question. But at a very high level of abstraction, critical race theory asserts that racial minorities are subject not just to individual racism but to a type of systemic racism built into our society and, more specifically, into our laws. It works to explore, understand, and undercut this legal and systemic racism.

I just said I’m not primarily a critical race theorist. But I’ve learned a lot from their research. Prof. Brown makes a compelling case that the racial wealth gap isn’t just the result of some white people being racist against some Black people. Rather, the tax law provides benefits that primarily accrue to white taxpayers, allowing them to build wealth, and detriments that largely accrue to people of color, which makes it harder for them to build wealth. (It’s also worth noting that the tax law isn’t the only mechanism impeding racial minorities from accumulating wealth. The history of redlining, racial disparities in lending, the different treatment of Black and white veterans by the G.I. Bill, and other legal and societal moves have all contributed to the differences.)

It’s also worth noting that critical race theory doesn’t present a particular set of answers to the problems of systemic and legal racism. Rather, critical race theorists present many and varied potential solutions, and sometimes, I imagine, no solutions at all.

All of this is to say, the anti-critical race theory actions of a handful of states are incoherent; the legislators proposing these bills don’t understand what critical race theory is and, instead, are looking to scapegoat something, and the something they’ve chosen is racial progress. They’re also making a performative stand since none has been able to point either to critical race theory being taught in grade schools or the harm that such teaching would do.

If you’re still with me you may be asking yourself, “Why is Sam writing about anti-critical race theory laws on a Mormon blog? After all, even if the Utah legislature made some performative act, Utah is different and separate from Mormonism.”

And honestly, that’s a good and legitimate question. It really annoys me when people conflate Utah and Mormonism and blame one on the other. Here, though, I have two reasons for writing. The first is, it’s worth underscoring that these laws and resolutions demonizing critical race theory have nothing to do with critical race theory.

But the second is, unfortunately, there’s a fairly blatant Mormon connection to Utah’s resolution. The primary sponsor of the resolution is Rep. Steve R. Christiansen. And Rep. Christiansen’s official legislative bio says he works for Presiding Bishopric Projects, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

And his day job doesn’t somehow transform his legislative proposals into church-sponsored proposals. But it is troubling to me that someone working for the Presiding Bishopric is also pushing a narrative that critical race theory, which aims to uncover racist laws and structures, is somehow harmful to children (because, idk, it forces them to confront flaws in their country and its laws?).

And it’s doubly troubling given that President Nelson has unreservedly condemned racism and, moreover, has pleaded with church members to “do whatever we can in our spheres of influence to preserve the dignity and respect every son and daughter of God deserves.”

Solving the problems that critical race theory uncovers is, of course, not the only way we can combat racism and preserve the dignity and respect our brothers and sisters deserve. But taking it off the table undermines efforts to build a Zion society where racial minorities will not face individual or systemic discrimination.


[fn1] If you’re interested, Prof. Brown has just published The Whiteness of Wealth. I haven’t read it yet, but it’s way up on my list of to-read-soon books. And based on her other scholarship—much of which I have read—I feel no hesitation in recommending it.


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 343

Trending Articles