They're not veiled at all!😅 I don't have any means for judging your thoughts other than the words you're writing here. So assumptions are inevitable. But they're just based on your replies. If you're focused on Rufo's politics instead of considering the problem he's pointing to, it's hard not to infer certain things from that.

Speaking of which, Rufo didn't admit to manufacturing this controversy, he admitted to "freezing the brand" of CRT and "putting all of the various cultural insanities under that brand category."

I'm sure we'd agree that this is dishonest.

But again, those "various cultural insanities" already existed. Rufo didn't manufacture them, he lumped them all together under one 'brand". And while it's true that this makes discourse (or at least productive discourse) more difficult, productive discourse is impossible when any attempt to address some of the genuinely troubling things happening in race education is dismissed as "right-wing" or racist. Especially, as I point out in the article, considering that these "anti-CRT bills" don't even mention CRT.

Talking about the controversy is more important than talking about how its been inaccurately branded. If your focus is on the latter, I'd say you're missing the larger point.

As for race education, I've written at length about how it can be improved: Teach history accurately and honestly. Encourage intelligent, nuanced conversation about race where ideas can be discussed freely and imperfectly. Don't reinforce the idea in children's minds that they're defined or divided by the colour of their skin. And certainly not by the experiences or actions of people whose skin happened to be the same colour. It's tragic that these even need to be stated explicitly in 2022.