Until recently, the term “critical race theory” (CRT) was barely mentioned outside of higher education or in left-wing activist circles. But recently, most attention to CRT has instead come from the right-wing in the United States, whether in the form of tweets, YouTube videos, or on Fox News, which has discussed CRT over 1,300 times in the past 3½ months. Many conservatives have coalesced around their opposition to CRT, and are supporting laws to censor discussing it in public schools.

‍Critical race theory is an academic framework, first envisioned by late Harvard Law Professor Derrick Bell, that analyzes racism not as a product of personal prejudice but instead as a product of social and legal constructs. For example, proponents of CRT would see race-based police brutality not as isolated incidents, but rather as result of larger systemic issues such as housing discrimination, over-incarceration, and the War on Drugs.

Conservatives who oppose critical race theory primarily tend to do so because they philosophically view racism in the United States as an individual issue, as opposed to a systemic one. As Margaret Thatcher once argued, “there’s no such thing as society. There are individual men and women.” To many conservatives, arguing that negative outcomes that disproportionately affect Black people are primarily a result of unjust socio-legal conditions undermines their belief in individualism.

However, the term “critical race theory” as used by many conservatives is nothing more than an amorphous umbrella term for left-of-center views on race or social justice. This can include cultural competency training, removing racist school mascots, and diversifying classroom curricula. Writer Chris Hayes has argued, “the right has rendered the term meaningless through over-deployment making it into a culture war rallying cry.”

As conservatives line up to censor critical race theory, here’s a question worth asking: how many public schools in the United States actually teach CRT? Despite the hype, there is no evidence of widespread or even limited CRT curricula in public schools. Most claims about CRT are borderline conspiracies about “indoctrinating” children. Also, public schools tend to be risk averse. Unlike private schools, public schools that upset parents are at risk of lawsuits and school board elections.

Given that critical race theory is not taught in public schools, why are proposals to censor discussion of it so problematic? NPR spoke to educators in states that are considering anti-CRT bills, and one interviewee said that her colleagues are already self-censoring “because they feel there are going to be repercussions from their [school] districts.” If educators are concerned that they may be falsely accused of discussing CRT, they may hold off talking about race at all out of fear.

During COVID-19, many educators and parents argued that in-person school was superior to virtual learning in a large part due to the importance of children’s social development. They had a point: while learning hard skills–such as math and science–are critical to a well-rounded education, so are soft skills, such as logical reasoning or being able to discuss difficult topics. Impeding the discussion of racism will not make it go away, but it will leave people ill-equipped to process it.

Children and teenagers are smarter than society acknowledges. Talented educators are able to facilitate discussions and craft age-appropriate lesson plans that both educate and also enable students to better process the world around them. We should not be discouraging educators from discussing important issues – especially on the basis of reactionary boogeyman arguments. On the contrary, we should actively encourage schools to foster an environment safe for critical thought.