Critical Race Theory: a tale of two colours

Hello! Today I would like to comment on the basic tenets of Critical Race Theory (CRT) as presented by H. Richard Milner IV in the article "Race, Culture, and Researcher Positionality: Working Through Dangers Seen, Unseen, and Unforeseen", which is part of the suggested readings for Unit 4 of EDD-802 at my doctoral program.  I will spice these ideas up with some of my impressions as a "coloured" student in a Canadian university and a "white" Costa Rican.  Bear with me!

Milner presents three main issues as central to CRT: "(a) the ingrained nature of race and racism in society and thus in education and education research; (b) the importance of narrative, counter-narrative, and the naming of one’s own reality in education; and (c) the centrality of interest convergence in education" (2007, p. 390).  According to the author, "race and racism are endemic, pervasive, widespread, and ingrained in society and thus in education" (p.390), which is reflected in the daily practice of living as either "White" (belonging to the dominant group), or "coloured" (part of the rest).  This also implies a series of roles, stigmata, expectations, and opportunities that are taken for granted.  Both White and coloured don't examine their roles, unless there's a clear conflict of interest.  In other words, there's reflection and self-evaluation only when there's a clash if a community or movement within the coloured group wants to enhance or acquire new rights.  This apparently static structure permeates education and even educational research (supossed to be critical and transformative) since educational institutions, as Foucault pointed out, reproduce the system and serve to perpetuate roles and discourses (for both oppressed and oppressing groups).  In my experience, as a Latin American of Italian, Spanish, Sephardite and indigenous ascent, I have been part of the dominant group in my native country: I am "white", male, heterosexual.  We will focus only on the first category.  However, when I had the chance of travelling to Canada, I realized I was being treated not only as a foreigner, but also as a "coloured" person in terms of customer service, attention I received when entering a place, or even by being the subject of suspicious looks.  Suddenly, (and this is an observation common to many Costa Ricans who have been abroad) I wasn't white any longer, but coloured, to my initial amazement.

The second tenet refers in general terms to discourse reflected as narratives: there's the official discourse (the "White" discourse), and then the "coloured" discourse, which can be considered as a counter-narrative: it's the version of the oppressed about the system they live in, and about their experience and reality.  As a foreign student, I tried to read the dominant discourse during my visit to Canada in the media, public advertisement, contact with public servants and officers, university staff, and fellow students.  Once again, I noticed there was a very clear dominant narrative in which my own narrative (now transformed into a counter-narrative) had no place whatsoever: I was a visiting student engaging in the dominant environment of a nation that considers itself multi-national. In this sense, the official discourse in Canada is basically identical to the official discourse in Costa Rica: we are young nations whose population is composed of native inhabitants, descendants of immigrants, and their subsequent intermarriages.  Thus, I could understand the official narrative but not identify with it. I had to create my own counter-narrative on the fly.  As my own reality in education required naming and expressing, I coined it: I was a mestizo in town, proudly wearing a baseball cap with native Canadian motives.  A new counter-narrative cultural manifestation became attractive to me, easy to identify and empathize with, and so I merged with this counter-narrative at least for my short stay. This might have been my own counter-narrative of the counter-narrative...

Finally, there's interest convergence.  In other words, when both the White and the coloured convene in some aspect of their agenda, or when the official narrative and the counter-narrative meet in some common ground, there's a mutual understanding that motivates positive (being optimistic, that is) change and transformation in society.  Milner writes, "People in power are often, in discourse, supportive of research, policies, and practices that do not oppress and discriminate against others as long as they—those in power—do not have to alter their own systems of privilege; they may not want to give up their own interests to fight against racism, confront injustice, or shed light on hegemony" (p. 391).  I read this as the point where either changes are inevitable because of their own moral weight, or when they happen because there are superior interests (Realpolitik as a meta-narrative?) that trigger evolution and demand the (partial) renouncing to some privileges (normally seen as rights by the dominant group).  I can think of the example of the abolition of Apartheid in South Africa, when representatives from both the White and the coloured communities agreed that such was the best path to follow for the higher good of the nation and their own interests in order to prevent further violence and conflict.  Will this arrive to Palestine soon, when Israelies and Palestinians accept that for the survival of both peoples, two states must be created, in spite of their differences, and all the history of violence between them? There are many other examples, of course.

To conclude, once I came back to Costa Rica, reading between the lines the official local narrative, my own narrative, and the counter-narratives of oppressed groups was easier to do.  Finding elements for convergence of interests is still a work in progress in many areas.  Nevertheless, I believe that peace and dialogue should prevail (this is in fact part of the dominant discourse in Costa Rica, go figure), but I also believe that there can be only true peace where there's true justice.  As a doctoral student and researcher, and as a person both "White" and "coloured" depending on the context I dabble in, I have now an enhanced sensitivity and hopefully better judgment to listen to different narratives and try to find points of communication and understanding.  As a researcher and teacher, it is my duty to help bring to the surface ignored counter-narratives, and to promote harmony between conflicting narratives, discourses, and interests for the higher good of all.