Trump pushes back against critical race theory
The ongoing reckoning with race, rampant throughout the United States, has been a great point of contention across the political spectrum. It has also been considered a deciding factor for a major demographic and age population in the 2020 US General Elections. Interwoven, in the conversation, is the Critical Race Theory, which essentially suggests that acts of injustice and illegality, are not solely influenced by psychological or physically obvious factors, but also societal and racial factors.
The theory, being something that can definitively prove the notion of white privilege and supremacy, is also something that can, at least on moral grounds, bring justification to certain urges in the protests and riots prevalent.
President Trump has been an active advocate against the theory, directly and indirectly. In a memo released by the Office of Management and Budget, the budget wing of the administration (headed by Secretary Russell Vought), all training and ethics briefings, that relate to the critical race theory, or those that nod to the notion that white privilege exists, were banned.
The memo, claims: “These types of "training" not only run counter to the fundamental beliefs for which our Nation has stood since its inception, but they also engender division and resentment within the Federal workforce”. The memo underlines the fundamental belief of the administration, that America is not a racist country, and that people who are white, do not benefit from a societal privilege, of which only they are beneficiaries.
It lays out strict guidelines for the banning of such “un-American” propaganda, claiming that it would be a waste of tax-payer money. It also addresses the apparent services that the President has a proven track record of, of serving the American people, and upholding the effort to create a “more perfect Union”.
The reaction to the memo has been mixed. There are some who believe that America is NOT a racist country, and somehow and somewhere, there is an implication that suggests otherwise. This faction of people, typically reject the controversial Black Lives Matters movement, don’t accept the critical race theory, and are the biggest defenders of not renaming historical buildings that are provocative of racial injustice. These people have also been known to flock to Trump, and the Republican party, although the debate is not on party lines.
Another faction of people, such as those actively advocating for the Black Lives Matter movement, believe (fully or partially), in the Critical Race Theory. They believe in the inherent concept of “White Privilege” or “White Supremacy”, claiming there is a biased system, benefiting only white people. For them, the memo can come as a major blow, to not only their own convictions but to upholding an apparent moral standard.
Whichever end of the opinion spectrum one falls into, the debate is pretty clear. Are there status-quo systems in institutions that are designed to benefit a certain demographic? Is examining our history, and the American story of the civil rights movement, necessary to influence the naming of bridges, roads and statues? And most importantly, will tearing down these systems (symbolically and physically), really change the morality of the acts of injustice?
Reporter: Omkar Mantri