The reason I ask is because much of DiAngelo's definitional framework and conceptual advice is considered by many to be self-defeating and counterproductive...as it focuses more on the broad strokes of guilt and shame rather than on systemic solutions. If indeed Douglass may have been skeptical about creating the identifiable category of "Critical Race Theory" itself, then I have a hard time believing he would have approved of DiAngelo's reductionist -- and, at times, rather vapid -- philosophies.