"Acting on racial prejudices by those not privileged by the system become at most racially motivted assaults because those not privileged will be punished by system enforcers, and the minority in question is not able to impose systemic rewards or punishments on their oppressors except in rare, truly blatant examples...like on Derek Chauvin."

Hence why it isn't an example of SYSTEMIC racism, when a White person is targeted by a BIPOC assailant. But it's still racism (even if you choose to call it a "racially-motivated assault") -- just of a social or cultural variety (rather than systemic).

There's a big difference between the philosophies of "Racism is often systemic" versus "Racism is *only* systemic." The former is why we need the work of Black Lives Matter and other activists to force systemic change; the latter discounts millions of people, and it's where I call bullshit on some indoctrination attempts.

I support the concept of Critical Race Theory being taught...but not when a central tenet of CRT is the reductionist assertion (with no room for debate or dispute) that "Racism is *only* systemic."

However, the last two paragraphs where you quoted yourself (from the your response to the linked article) definitely summarize a core objective of CRT with eloquence and strong purpose. I just wish more of the CRT adherents actually understood how their actions end up overcompensating in a way that repels people from embracing that actual goal (which you'd worded, and then self-quoted).