The more I learn, my issue is not with CRT, but rather applied CRT. "Applied" CRT abuses CRT, which is a legal theory (not proven fact) that argues certain laws promote racism even when they don't intend to because of the history behind the law.

For example, universities that give alumni children preference while not designed to be racist, can act to discriminate against people of color if the vast majority of alumni are white or vica versa if the university is one that was previously a university historically serving minorities.

On the other hand, if alumni loyalty leads to greater contributions to the school

s "scholarship" endowment funds and those endowments are used to disproportionately fund scholarships to people of color with financial need, the latter is also "racist" but in the latter case the racism is intentional in order to achieve equity an accidental by product of history.

At some level, both are wrong if the overriding goal is a society that judges people on their character and not their skin color or where their parents attended college. Sadly, teaching American history to promote ideolology is equally wrong regardless of which ideology history is being manipulated to support.

History should be taught to support ideology, it should be taught so the people know what happened, so we don't repeat past errors. Today, I see a trend among progressive liberals to advocate "institutional racism" to "fix" past racism. But those solutions inevidibly lead to a group feeling discriminated against... I see this in how many Asian today feel about how they are disriminated against by woke universities trying to achieve "quotas" rahter than accepting students using objective color blind criteria.