I am curious whether you think these points hit close enough to the mark to be legitimately considered "critical race theory" (or sufficiently thoroughly derived such that calling it CRT is not an egregious error), if they were to be taught:

Understand and analyze the impact of systems of power, including white supremacy, institutional racism, racial hierarchy, and oppression. (Historical thinking)

Identify the motivations, tools, and implications of power, authority, and governance as it relates to systems of oppression and its impact on ethnic and religious groups and other historically marginalized groups.

Identify issues related to historical events to recognize power, authority, religion, and governance as it relates to systemic oppression and its impact on indigenous peoples and ethnic and religious groups, and other traditionally marginalized groups in the modern era

Evaluate the influence of the intersections of identity, including but not limited to, gender, age, race, ethnicity, religion, physical and mental disability, and class on the living histories and experiences of peoples, groups, and events.

If this is not reasonably labeled "Critical Race Theory", what label can you use to distinguish it from other kinds of DEI-type instruction and viewpoints, such as those summarized by:

These lessons include narratives that emphasize the contributions of diverse individuals in shaping US democratic life. It is important for students to see the widest range of individual backgrounds as well as forms of engagement to recognize the contributions already made to our democracy by different groups.