I agree with all the above (except the suppositions included in the last sentence), I am not sure who is accusing of whitewashing anything.
Richard Pryor's treatment of recovery comes to mind. In it he is listing the issues he faces related to his addiction.
His friend, a Football Star as I recall, kept responding "What you gonna do?"
You need to pick a path forward, and responding to racism with racism is a poor choice.
If the goal is EQUALITY (NOT 'equity'), then striving for that goal should be paramount. Equal rights and equal responsibilities, no more and no less is the key.
"Special treatment" was provided for Jews in Europe some time back. Be careful what you ask for.
If the goal is to reestablish any societal divides that have served us to badly so far, for whatever lofty reasons, the outcome is predictable.
What I find appalling is that, given the horrific results of racism in our collective past, that anyone should recommend racism to 'correct' the situation. What could go wrong with that approach?
CRT is all about racism, specifically as it relates to Blacks of African origin (Little Black Sambo was Burmese - tigers are Asian). Given the ill treatment of Chinese, Japanese, Algonquins, Navajo, Jews, and the Irish, I'd say Blacks are in pretty good company.
My whole point is not to deny that the massacre in Tulsa was ghastly or that Custer had it coming, but that the best approach is to lay off on the racism rather than wallowing in it.
'Good' racism is just as bad as 'bad' racism. It all sucks.
BSBD,
Winsor