The New Hampshire Senate is currently considering the “divisive concepts amendment” that was rejected by the House as a stand-alone bill, but hidden in the proposed state budget, HB2. It would prohibit discussion of racial, ethnic, and gender bias and discrimination in schools, agencies, and businesses. This limitation of free speech does nothing to address social and economic divisions. In truth, conversations increase understanding and make our communities stronger.

Fortunately, our free press is a forum for such discussions, and Dr. Michael D. Breen, MPA, Ph.D., was kind enough to bring up Critical Race Theory (the Telegraph 4/18/21), which has become the right wing’s divisive concept boogie man of choice. Dr. Breen argues that CRT is “a scientifically illiterate assertion” or “anti-intellectual tautology,” whatever that means. His argument is actually an excellent example of the Straw Man propaganda technique. He mischaracterizes, then redefines CRT using highly selective quotes that suit his political/philosophical biases, thus fashioning a scary straw man he can then shoot down.

I assume when Dr. Breen hints at “other reasons” to explain our problems of persistent social stratification and unequal treatment, he is referring to supposed genetic, moral, or biological insufficiencies among minority groups, or perhaps Social Darwinism. Both assert that the dominion of the Anglo-Saxon “race” is simply the natural prize for having evolved the best set of genes. There are no scientific bases for these theories; they are pseudo-sciences discredited by everyone except the broad Marjory Taylor Greene wing of the GOP.

Critical Race Theory is really a process that examines race as a social construct created by those in power to justify subjugation of other groups to maintain power. They identify “out-groups,” which can change with political expediency, and label them as genetically, morally, or otherwise inferior or dangerous. This justifies using legal or political structures, and physical force, to limit their access to desirable jobs, schools, housing, and the legal system, perpetuating the inequality.

An example from my own experience illustrates how pernicious systemic racism is. My father and father-in-law were among the millions of white people who once were convinced that black people were unable to swim. “They just sank like stones” in Navy basic training for World War II combat. What our fathers didn’t know, because it’s difficult to recognize one’s own privilege, was that until civil rights reforms of the 1960s, black people were legally excluded from public pools and most swimming holes and beaches. They couldn’t swim because laws and social structures prevented them from learning how. Even after the Civil Rights Movement outlawed segregation, systemic and institutional racism was adamant: rather than allowing black and white children to share facilities, thousands of cities and towns shut down their municipal pools. Thus began the “privatization” of swimming pools in exclusive clubs, gated communities, and millions of back yards in neighborhoods that knew how to keep people of color on the other side of the Red Line. As people of color have managed over many decades to build and create access to places where they can learn to swim, they’ve proved that their ancestors’ difficulties were about systemic racism, not some innate flaw.

There are a million small examples that have played out over the years, decades, and centuries, but the impacts on American society have been profound, and very often, tragic. Critical Race Theory asks us to see systemic racism as it exists, not just in history, but today. As Professor Kimberle Crenshaw of UCLA explains about CRT, “… the so-called American dilemma was not simply a matter of prejudice but a matter of structured disadvantages that stretched across American society — we took up the task of exploring the role that law played in establishing… practices of exclusion and disadvantage…. Like American history itself, a proper understanding of the ground upon which we stand requires a balanced assessment, not a simplistic commitment to jingoistic accounts of our nation’s past and current dynamics.”

Systemic discrimination thrives in denial and silence. We need more conversation, not less, about reforming systems that limit access to the blessings of liberty. By understanding the origins of systemic racism and sexism and the ways in which they harm all of us, we can continue moving toward a society, here in New Hampshire and beyond, where we can all live with freedom and dignity as full participants in a diverse democratic republic. Please tell your Senators and Representatives to reject the “divisive concepts amendment” and pass a clean budget that serves us all.

Jean Lewandowski is a resident of Nashua.