CRT is primarily a theory of jurisprudence. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/civil-rights-reimagining-policing/a

CRT is primarily a theory of jurisprudence. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/civil-rights-reimagining-policing/a-lesson-on-critical-race-theory/ https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_r... CRT has been conflated with various other things, primarily the NYT's 1619 Project and other attempts to communicate other aspects of true, historical events besides the received, primarily white tradition. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/12/historians-clash-1619-project/604093/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/12/historians... I do not find in either founding myth of "critical race theory" anything that includes your hypothesized "all whites are inherently guilty of racism". You might criticize the lawyers and educators for not communicating this clearly enough, but I wonder if any explanation of CRT would pass muster for most of it's critics.