In theory? No. In practice? I'll let you be the judge using the very next post as a case in point.
Here, our friend PhDeac has decided that you either agree with him, or you are a racist. Despite his agile and robust intellect, the good Doctor has proven himself unwilling to cough up any another explanation for a dissenting opinion on this topic. I believe in this rare instance, his approach is simplistic and self-serving.
Yes, there are people who oppose CRT because they are racists. Sure. Attempting to dismiss all dissent as being motivated by this factor is, well, simplistic and self-serving.
There are also people who oppose CRT because attempting to explain all of life's complicated challenges by pointing to race every single time will have you up at 1:58 in the morning posting on the internet about an outbreak of unreported murders. These people believe that race is one of many important factors in explaining historical outcomes. You can talk about race without making it a lifestyle. Or a career.
Teaching about our complicated history from diverse points of view is the right approach. Count me in this camp. Do people think modern academia currently pays insufficient attention to the issues of race? Of class? Of gender?
Yet another school of thought believes that fixation with race is harmful in its own right. The Chief Justice famously said, "[t]he way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." In Sig's favorite clip, Morgan Freeman says as follows:
I don't believe Morgan Freeman is a white supremacist. He just disagrees with you. It happens.
This reads like a Colbert Report segment.
https://www.cc.com/video/492fjx/the-colbert-report-ending-racism
https://www.cc.com/video/3vijkd/the-colbert-report-the-word-color-bind