Edit: I left this comment which refers to the older longer CRT-containing version of the story because some of the discussion is high-value, I think, and also because it illustrates that the original was already called out for being too long.

I don't think that's what Derrick Bell* or Kimberle Crenshaw think--or even Ibram X. Kendi, for that matter (e.g. in https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/07/opponents-critical-race-theory-are-arguing-themselves/619391/).

But, amusingly, even Derrick Bell himself might have to agree with you that if a lot of white people seem drawn to CRT in a positive way, it would have to be because it's a distraction (this is "interest convergence").

My sense is that this is not mostly true about people who support actual CRT as opposed to the right-wing boogeyman version. But it's difficult to discern what internal psychological motivations people might have, so I have to acknowledge that you may be right that a lot of it is appealing as a distraction.

It was a long piece. But since my thesis is not about simple factual errors, or about malicious intent, but about how a misguided approach to inquiry leads to well-intentioned but fallacious reasoning, it was hard to make it shorter.

(* Bell is, sadly, deceased. Since I also am not consulting Crenshaw or Kendi directly, I speak of Bell in the present tense, since everyone's thoughts about the matter are hypothetical: I am not providing direct quotes of clear relevance.)