Critical theory examines how the bad parts of human nature get embedded in systems where they don't have to be embedded.
Here, I think, may be where I diverge from some CRT: Just because a government is "erected' by a white majority doesn't mean it is inherently or inevitably racist.** But when a white government is erected by white people in an environment and era that is overtly racist and embraces subjugation of an entire race, that's going to work its way into the systems and structures of that government and society in ways the racist "erectors" or founders even didn't fully appreciate, much less the later comers that are trying to eradicate the racism.
**I think some CRT believes that it is inherently and inevitably true. Maybe it is, but I think that's a pretty nihilistic view of human nature, which is where that criticism of it creeps in. While I acknowledge that protection and realization of self-interest is strongly embodied in our government, I have never considered it essential to my "protection" or self-interest or that of my family or peers to gain at the expense of others of another race. I do acknowledge that some aspects of realizing self-interest (an inartful perhaps articulation of "capitalism") comes at the expense of others, it's usually an abstract other, not a specific other.
So, there are some people that are going to remain racist no matter what. I agree with you there. But, I think it's possible to mostly marginalize those people. What I see CRT doing is identifying relics or artifacts of racism that get built into the system because the system was created in an era where racism was not marginalized.
Some of those artifacts can only be addressed by changing personal attitudes or removing those holding those attitudes from power, and that may be a tall order in a lot of cases. Other times, the artifacts are built into systems or structures that need to be refined or rebuilt.
Let's give an example that kind of predates CRT, but is right down CRTs alley: juries. In retrospect, at least, it's fairly obvious that there is a huge potential for the indulgence of overt and very subtle racism by juries in their deliberations. That one is going to be hard to address, because it deals with people's internal attitudes and beliefs they may not even realize they hold. But you know what we can do? Tinker with the jury selection system to minimize the possibility of getting a tainted jury. Prosecutors may not have been overtly thinking "let's hang this nagger" when striking black jurors from a black defendant's jury. Some were, but others were just trying to win their convictions (and there may be a lot of subtle racism involved in how the prosecutors came to believe that securing the conviction is just or righteous and so on and so forth). But "we" didn't address this issue until 1986, and it isn't fully solved yet. That system, as well as others in the justice system, still need some work.
Those that have followed me over the years probably see this as a "reversal" of position. And I guess to some extent it is. I am guilty of believing that racists had been mostly marginalized in this country. Recent events have proven that not only are they not marginalized, but they are sufficiently numerous and loud that they are on the verge of taking over in a minority-majority role. I'm also guilty of believing, to an extent, that "our work is done" with regard to civil rights. Yes, we've done a lot of the work in broad strokes, but there's a lot of fine tuning that remains. It's time to get to the nitty gritty.
I see CRT, or aspects of it, as having value in "getting to the nitty gritty." I don't have to agree with it 100% up and down the line, but it has value. What I see proposed in DEI initiatives and real, concrete things being labeled CRT by the hysterical doesn't tend to include the more extreme aspects of some CRT. I tend to agree that extreme aspects of CRT may be a bit much for even high school students and don't endorse it being taught at that level.
And at the university level, I have zero problem in full-on CRT being taught. College students should be able to handle it. I got a dose of it in the late 80s in law school and thought parts of it were fairly ridiculous, but it was thought-provoking for sure, has stuck with me for 30 years, and allows me to think about it and discuss it with some degree of insight. And that's valuable. Period.