# data[].attributes.body
An excerpt from Bettina Love's book, "We Want To Do More Than Survive"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Get access to files anywhere through secure cloud storage and file backup for your photos, videos, files and more with Google Drive.

# data[].attributes.headline
Supplemental: Answering Your Questions on Critical Race Theory

# data[].attributes.subject
Supplemental: Answering Your Questions on Critical Race Theory

# data[].attributes.body
PBS News Hour

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
WATCH: Answering your questions on critical race theory

# data[].attributes.headline
Supplemental: Why Americans are so Divided Over Teaching Critical Race Theory

# data[].attributes.subject
Supplemental: Why Americans are so Divided Over Teaching Critical Race Theory

# data[].attributes.body
PBS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Americans are so divided over teaching critical race theory

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Critical race theory, or CRT — often a graduate-level framework examining how the legacy of slavery and segregation in America is embedded in its legal systems and policies — has become the source of a political flashpoint across the country. The debate over its potential role in school curricula has roiled school districts and state legislatures nationwide. Amna Nawaz reports.

# data[].attributes.headline
Supplemental: There Is No Debate Over Critical Race Theory

# data[].attributes.subject
Supplemental: There Is No Debate Over Critical Race Theory

# data[].attributes.body
Ibram X. Kendi, The Atlantic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Pundits and politicians have created their own definition for the term, and then set about attacking it.

The United States is not in the midst of a "culture war" over race and racism. The animating force of our current conflict is not our differing values, beliefs, moral codes, or practices. The American people aren't divided. The American people are being divided.

Republican operatives have buried the actual definition of critical race theory: "a way of looking at law's role platforming, facilitating, producing, and even insulating racial inequality in our country," as the law professor Kimberlé Crenshaw, who helped coin the term, recently defined it. Instead, the attacks on critical race theory are based on made-up definitions and descriptors. "Critical race theory says every white person is a racist," Senator Ted Cruz has said. "It basically teaches that certain children are inherently bad people because of the color of their skin," said the Alabama state legislator Chris Pringle.

There are differing points of view about race and racism. But what we are seeing and hearing on news shows, in school-district meetings, in op-ed pages, in legislative halls, and in social-media feeds aren't multiple sides with differing points of view. There's only one side in our so-called culture war right now.
Conor Friedersdorf: Critical race theory is making both parties flip-flop
The Republican operatives, who dismiss the expositions of critical race theorists and anti-racists in order to define critical race theory and anti-racism, and then attack those definitions, are effectively debating themselves. They have conjured an imagined monster to scare the American people and project themselves as the nation's defenders from that fictional monster.

The evangelist Pat Robertson recently called critical race theory "a monstrous evil." And over the past year, that "monstrous evil" has supposedly been growing many legs. First, Republicans pointed to Black Lives Matter demonstrators. Three days after George Floyd's murder last year, President Donald Trump recast the largely peaceful demonstrators as violent and dishonorable "THUGS." By the end of July, Trump had framed them as "anarchists who hate our country."

Then "cancel culture" was targeted. At the Republican National Convention in August, Trump blasted "cancel culture" as seeking to coerce Americans "into saying what you know to be false and scare you out of saying what you know to be true."

Next came attacks on the 1619 Project and American history. "Despite the virtues and accomplishments of this Nation, many students are now taught in school to hate their own country, and to believe that the men and women who built it were not heroes, but rather villains," read Trump's executive order on November 2, establishing the President's Advisory 1776 Commission.

And now the Black Lives Matter demonstrators, cancel culture, the 1619 Project, American history, and anti-racist education are presented to the public as the many legs of the "monstrous evil" of critical race theory that's purportedly coming to harm white children. The language echoes the rhetoric used to demonize desegregation after the Brown v. Board of Education decision, in 1954.

In the 1950s and '60s, the conservators of racism organized to keep Black kids out of all-white schools. Today, they are trying to get critical race theory out of American schools. "Instead of helping young people discover that America is the greatest, most tolerant, and most generous nation in history, [critical race theory] teaches them that America is systemically evil and that the hearts of our people are full of hatred and malice," Trump wrote in an op-ed on June 18.

After it was cited 132 times on Fox News shows in 2020, critical race theory became a conservative obsession this year. Its mentions on Fox News practically doubled month after month: It was referred to 51 times in February, 139 times in March, 314 times in April, 589 times in May, and 737 times in just the first three weeks of June. As of June 29, 26 states had introduced legislation or other state-level actions to "restrict teaching critical race theory or limit how teachers can discuss racism and sexism," according to Education Week, and nine had implemented such bans.

I have been called the father of critical race theory, although I was born in 1982, and critical race theory was born in 1981. Over the past few months, I have seldom stopped to answer the critiques of critical race theory or of my own work, because the more I've studied these critiques, the more I've concluded that these critics aren't arguing against me. They aren't arguing against anti-racist thinkers. They aren't arguing against critical race theorists. These critics are arguing against themselves.
Read: The GOP's 'critical race theory' obsession
What happens when a politician falsely proclaims what you think, and then criticizes that proclamation? Is she really critiquing your ideas-or her own? If a writer decides what both sides of an argument are stating, is he really engaging in an argument with another writer, or is he engaging in an argument with himself?

Take the journalist Matthew Yglesias. In February, in The Washington Post, he wrote that I think that "any racial gap simply is racist by definition; any policy that maintains such a gap is a racist policy; and-most debatably-any intellectual explanation of its existence (sociological, cultural and so on) is also racist." But nowhere have I written that the racial gap is racist: The policies and practices causing the racial gap are racist. Nowhere have I stated that any intellectual explanation of the existence of a racial gap is racist. Only intellectual explanations of a racial gap that point to the superiority or inferiority of a racial group are racist.

Was Yglesias really arguing against me, or was he arguing against himself? What about the columnist Ross Douthat? In a recent op-ed in The New York Times, he did what GOP thinkers keep doing to Americans striving to construct an equitable and just society: re-create us as extremists, as monsters to be feared for speaking out against racism. Douthat accused me of "ideological extremism that embarrasses clever liberals," comparing me to the late Rush Limbaugh. I've spent my career writing evidence-based historical scholarship and demonstrating my willingness to be vulnerable; Limbaugh had no interest in being self-critical, and for decades attacked truth and facts and evidence.

Douthat claimed that I have a "Manichaean vision of public policy, in which all policymaking is either racist or antiracist, all racial disparities are the result of racism-and the measurement of any outcome short of perfect 'equity' may be a form of structural racism itself."

Where did he get perfect equity? In How to Be an Antiracist, I define racial equity as a state "when two or more racial groups are standing on a relatively equal footing." I proposed that an example of racial equity would be "if there were relatively equitable percentages" of racial groups "living in owner-occupied homes in the forties, seventies, or, better, nineties." By contrast, in 2014, 71 percent of white families lived in owner-occupied homes, compared with 45 percent of Latino families and 41 percent of Black families. That's racial inequity.

What we write doesn't matter to the people arguing with themselves. It doesn't matter that I consistently challenge Manichaean racial visions of inherently good or evil people or policy making. It doesn't matter that I don't write about policy making being good or evil, or that I write about the equitable or inequitable outcome of policies. It doesn't matter that I've urged us toward relative equity, and not toward perfect equity.

If you want to understand why I've made these arguments, you first need to recognize that for decades, right-wing thinkers and judges have argued that policies that lead to racial inequities are "not racist" or are "race neutral." That was the position of the conservative Supreme Court justices who recently upheld Arizona's voting-restriction policies. Those who wish to conserve racial inequity want us to focus on intent-which is hard to prove-rather than the outcome of inequity, which is rather easy to prove. Case in point: GOP state legislators are claiming that the 28 laws they've enacted in 17 states as of June 21 are about election security, even though voter fraud is a practically nonexistent problem. They claim that these laws aren't intended to make it harder for Black voters or members of other minority groups to cast ballots, even as experts find that's precisely what such laws have done in the past, and predict that's likely what these new laws will do as well.
Jarvis R. Givens: What's missing from the discourse about anti-racist teaching
These critics aren't just making up their claims as they go along. They are making up the sources of their criticism as they go along. Douthat argues that work like mine "extends structural analysis beyond what it can reasonably bear, into territory where white supremacy supposedly explains Asian American success on the SAT." Who is giving this explanation other than Douthat? I'm surely not. I point to other explanations, including the history of highly educated Asian immigrants and the concentration of score-boosting test-prep companies in Asian (and white) neighborhoods.

White supremacy does explain why more than three-quarters of the perpetrators of anti-Asian hate crimes and incidents before and during the pandemic have been white. Asian American success as measured by test scores, education, and income should not erase the impact of structural racism on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. This group now has the highest income inequality of any racial group in the United States. Asian Americans in New York experienced the highest surge of unemployment of any racial group during the pandemic. Do the critics of critical race theory want us to think of the AAPI community as not just a "model minority," but a model monolith? Showcasing AAPIs to maintain the fiction of a postracial society ends up erasing Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders.

Critical race theory has been falsely labeled as anti-Asian. Helen Raleigh, an Asian American entrepreneur, defined critical race theory as a "divisive discriminatory ideology that judges people on the basis of their skin color" in Newsweek. "It is my practice to ignore critics who have not read the work and who are not interested in honest exchange," responded one of the three Asian American founders of critical race theory, Mari Matsuda, a law professor at the University of Hawaii. "But I do want to say this for the record: Asian Americans are at the center of CRT analysis and have been from the start."

How should thinkers respond to monstrous lies? Should we mostly ignore the critics as Matsuda has, as I have? Because restating facts over and over again gets old. Reciting your own work over and over again to critics who either haven't read what they are criticizing or are purposefully distorting it gets old. And talking with people who have created a monologue with two points of view, theirs and what they impute to you, gets old.

But democracy needs dialogue. And dialogue necessitates seeking to know what a person is saying in order to offer informed critiques.

As a scholar, I know that nothing is more useful than criticism to improve my scholarship. As a human being, I know that nothing is more constructive than criticism to improve my humanity. I've chronicled how criticism and critics have been a driving force on my journey to be anti-racist, to confront my own racist, sexist, homophobic, and classist ideas-and their intersections. Constructive criticism often hurts, but like painful medical treatments, it can be lifesaving; it can be nation-saving.

But what's happening now is something entirely different and destructive-not constructive. This isn't a "culture war." This isn't even an "argument." This isn't even "criticism." This is critics arguing with themselves.

​When you buy a book using a link on this page, we receive a commission. Thank you for supporting The Atlantic.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
actual definition of critical race theory

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
alabama state legislator chris pringle.there

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
intellectual explanation of its existence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
intellectual explanation of the existence of a racial gap

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
There Is No Debate Over Critical Race Theory

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pundits and politicians have created their own definition for the term, and then set about attacking it.

# data[].attributes.headline
Main Source: Critical Race Theory Battles are Driving Frustrated, Exhausted Educators out of their Jobs

# data[].attributes.subject
Main Source: Critical Race Theory Battles are Driving Frustrated, Exhausted Educators out of their Jobs

# data[].attributes.body
NBC News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When Rydell Harrison started a new job as a school superintendent in southwestern Connecticut last August, he was excited to join a community that seemed committed to diversity and equity.

The Easton, Redding and Region 9 district, which covers two small, mostly white towns, had recently established a task force and allocated money to address the racial climate in schools. That decision was a response to the hundreds of students and recent alumni who wrote to school board members following George Floyd's murder to describe racist incidents they'd experienced or witnessed at school. To Harrison, the task force was a sign that the community sat up and listened when young people advocated for change.

Things shifted, however, after the riot at the U.S. Capitol in January.

Some local residents started to complain that the diversity efforts were Harrison's "agenda," rather than something students and alumni requested. They labeled Harrison, the district's first Black superintendent, an "activist" pushing to indoctrinate students with critical race theory. School board meetings filled with opponents lasted late into the night.

A mailer sent to community members from Nonpartisan Action for a Better Redding, a conservative nonprofit group, featured a Facebook post Harrison had written condemning conspiracy theories that fueled the Capitol riot, and it urged people to complain to school board members about him. Others mailers came from a political group called Save Our Schools, run by two Easton residents who no longer have children in the district, and questioned whether the district had a problem with bias and discrimination at all.

Harrison began to doubt whether he could lead the community on its diversity efforts in the face of so much opposition. At the end of June, he announced that he would resign.

"People have asked me, 'Was it one flyer too many?' And it wasn't just this one thing," Harrison said. "It was the collection of all of these pieces and the emotional and personal toll to be a Black man doing this work and facing very blatant attacks left and right."

Harrison is one of a small but growing number of educators who have left their jobs after school districts became inundated in recent months by furious parents who've accused them of teaching critical race theory, an academic framework usually taught in graduate schools that posits racial discrimination is embedded within U.S. laws and policies. Administrators at virtually every district facing these conflicts - including Harrison's - have insisted they don't teach critical race theory, but conservative activists are using that label for a range of diversity and equity initiatives that they consider too progressive, prompting lawmakers in 22 states to propose limits on how schools can talk about racial issues.

"In education, we have responded to opposition with truth and facts and being able to say, 'Yeah, I can see why that'd be a concern, but this is what is really happening.' In most cases that works for us," Harrison said. "But when facts are no longer part of the discussion, our tools to reframe the conversation and get people back on board are limited."

Against the backdrop of hostility to discussions of race in schools - and as five states have passed laws limiting how teachers can address "divisive concepts" with students - administrators and teachers across the country say they have been pushed out of their districts. Some have opted to leave public schools entirely, while others are fighting to save their career. The result in these districts is what educators and experts describe as a brain drain of those who are most committed to fighting racism in schools.

In Southlake, Texas, at least four administrators who were instrumental in crafting or implementing a plan combat racial and cultural discrimination in the Carroll Independent School District left the district this spring following a community backlash to diversity and inclusion efforts.

In Eureka, Missouri, the only Black woman in the Rockwood School District's administration resigned from her position as diversity coordinator after threats of violence grew so severe that the district hired private security to patrol her house.

"This is going to cause an exodus among an already scarce recruiting field in education," said Kumar Rashad, a Louisville, Kentucky, math teacher and local teachers union leader. "People aren't entering the field as much as they were, and now we have this to chase them away."

In Sullivan County, Tennessee, Matthew Hawn, a white high school social studies teacher, is facing termination after assigning an essay on President Donald Trump by writer Ta-Nehisi Coates and showing a video of a poetry reading about white privilege that included curse words. The district accused Hawn, who is appealing to save his job, of not showing opposing viewpoints. Both Hawn and the district declined to comment.

In Florida, Education Commissioner Richard Corcoran said " we made sure" that Amy Donofrio, a white English teacher in Jacksonville, was fired for displaying a Black Lives Matter banner in her classroom at Robert E. Lee High School. Donofrio, who was removed from teaching duties by school officials in March but has not yet been fired, has sued the district, claiming administrators violated her free speech rights and retaliated against her for advocating for Black students.

"It felt like waking up in a horror movie," Donofrio said. "Not just for what it means for me - which is obviously terrifying, this is my career, this is my life's work - but horrifying because of the message it sends to teachers throughout the state of Florida."

Donofrio's suit is pending in federal court, and the district declined to comment. The Florida Department of Education did not respond to a request for comment.

Jonathan Friedman, director of free expression and education at PEN America, a free speech advocacy group, said it's "highly alarming" that educators are resigning, facing dismissal and fearing for their lives due to conversations about racism and diversity.

"There is great risk that a creeping censoriousness will overtake our public schools, purging them of a diversity of teachers and talent and winnowing the critical lenses through which young people should be encouraged to view history and society," he said.

On May 25, the anniversary of Floyd's murder, school board members for Connecticut's Easton, Redding and Region 9 district debated over Zoom until 2 a.m. on whether to endorse a statement committing to equity and diversity. They ultimately passed it, but only after eliminating the words "equity" and "systemic" over Harrison's objections.

Harrison felt he was losing ground if even the concept of systemic racism was still up for debate.

"Trying to explain to someone that systemic racism is a thing, at the core of that you're trying to show that my lived experiences as a person of color matter," Harrison said.

At the same meeting, school board members also argued over whether to survey middle and high school students and parents on their experiences with discrimination. The survey would be anonymous and optional, but some residents and board members didn't want sixth graders to be asked for their gender identity or sexual orientation, so they tabled it. Board members agreed to the survey a week later after clarifying that students could only take it if their parents gave permission.

At a June 30 school board meeting, five days after Harrison announced his resignation, several residents said they hoped the district would change course on anti-racism efforts.

One resident said he hoped the next superintendent "will steer our kids away from the fringes of ideology." Dana Benson, one of the residents running Save Our Schools and a local Republican donor, said that without the assumptions of critical race theory, there would be no need for the district's diversity and equity plans.

Heather Whaley, a school board member and chair of the diversity and equity task force, reminded her colleagues that the efforts to combat discrimination predated Harrison.

"Dr. Harrison came to a district that was looking to do that work, and look at how he was treated," she said, apologizing to Harrison for the attacks he'd weathered.

Harrison hopes his departure is not seen as him giving in to his critics. He will leave his post in September and go to work for the Connecticut Center for School Change, a nonprofit education consultant organization, where he'll advise schools on diversity and equity policies.

"I'm ready to be engaged in the next level of work, to keep this going and stay in the fray," he said.

He's far from the only superintendent to face such animosity.

AASA, the professional organization of school superintendents, received so many calls from administrators asking for help that it started hosting virtual sessions for superintendents to discuss how they were handling the anti-critical race theory protests, said Daniel Domenech, the association's executive director.

According to Domenech, some superintendents described how the stress carried over into their personal lives, causing them to lash out at family members. In several cases, school boards threatened to fire superintendents if they didn't eliminate diversity and equity initiatives, he said.

"I've seen some tough times in my years as a superintendent but nothing like what these people have gone through this year and probably will continue to next school year," said Domenech, who was superintendent of the school district in Fairfax County, Virginia, during the 2002 Beltway snipers attacks and the terrorism of 9/11.

The local backlash to addressing race in schools has been fueled in part by national conservative groups and activists, who see the anti-critical race theory fights as a winning political issue and have helped parents mobilize. As more parents confronted administrators over diversity and equity initiatives over the past year, their activism has been highlighted by conservative media, amplifying the pressure on districts.

"A single school district can't combat a national propaganda machine that's intent on pushing a particular narrative and driving wedges in communities," said Tracey Benson, associate executive director of the Arizona School Boards Association.

Hoping to avoid upset parents coming to board meetings, some districts have not only scrutinized instructional materials, they've also curtailed student speech.

After a student-designed yearbook cover in Texas included the words "science is real, Black lives matter, no human is illegal, love is love," the school district placed an art teacher on leave over parent complaints. A district in New York censored a presentation about racial justice created by a group of eighth graders. A Florida school district temporarily halted the sale of a student-produced yearbook because it discussed the Black Lives Matter movement, but did not mention the pro-police "Blue lives matter" slogan.

Rita Kohli, an education professor at the University of California, Riverside who studies the racial climate in schools, said schools need to trust children to be independent thinkers.

"I don't think schools should ever be indoctrinating kids," she said, "but what are we saying about schools if we say any time they bring in a touchy subject it's indoctrination? What are they doing the rest of the time?"

Brittany Hogan became the diversity coordinator for the Rockwood School District, in the suburbs of St. Louis, last year. She was the only Black woman in the mostly white district's administration, which could be isolating at times, she said. But she also felt she had a critical role to play for students of color.

"For a lot of Black students, the only time they see a reflection of themselves is when they see me," she said.

St. Louis County has the largest and longest-running school desegregation program in the country, which Hogan oversaw, busing students from the city to the predominately white suburban schools. Rockwood, where 75 percent of students are white, enrolls 1,400 children from St. Louis.

Shortly after last fall's election, Hogan said, she started receiving letters from parents who did not approve of diversity initiatives and a districtwide reading program that included books by Black authors. One woman called her to say her work was "ungodly" and that she would pray for her, Hogan said.

Emails to administrators obtained by NBC News through a public records request show community members began to dig up Hogan's old tweets, claiming she made comments that were racist against white people. In one tweet that parents repeatedly cited, Hogan wrote "new podcast alert" with a screenshot for " Nice White Parents," a series produced by The New York Times that examines efforts to address inequality in Brooklyn schools. Parents inaccurately claimed in emails to administrators and school board members that Hogan had tweeted that "the problem in public schools is white parents" and that she was "blaming white people."

Things escalated in March when the superintendent announced his decision to bar "thin blue line" symbols - which are black, white and blue variations of the American flag meant to support police - from baseball uniforms. Though Hogan had no involvement in the decision, she began receiving threats a day later. By the end of the week, the district had hired security to patrol her house and that of Terry Harris, another Black administrator in Rockwood who received threats. Hogan became too scared to come to the district office for work.

"While I was in a position of power, I was the lowest on the totem pole in terms of societal power, being a Black woman," she said. "I was an easy target in the face of race and racism."

Harris, Rockwood's director of student services, was also growing concerned. On social media, people posted pictures of him with his teenage daughter and called him the "most racist person" they'd ever met. He changed his work schedule in response to the threats. Emails show he repeatedly offered to arrange a phone call or in-person meeting with parents to address their concerns, which he hoped would ease their anxiety, but parents insisted he answer their questions about diversity and equity initiatives in writing.

"We know what this story is about," Harris said. "It's about talking about race, and we are the two highest-ranking Black people in the district."

He considered leaving his job to spare his family from the harassment, but he said he decided against it after conversations with a school board member, his mentor and his wife.

"Critical race theory is going to go away, but you know something is going to replace critical race theory and whatever does replace it is going to be race-related," he said. "You get to a point where you are not afraid anymore."

For Hogan, the toll of the harassment was too much. She submitted her resignation letter in April. It was a difficult decision, she said, because she loved the work.

"One of the biggest joys I have is being an educator," said Hogan, who plans to work in the nonprofit sector. "But the job didn't seem worth my emotional and physical safety. Mentally, it was disrupting my inner peace, the stress of it."

It's a stark contrast from last summer, when Hogan believed people were ready to have "real conversations about race and equity and how those things were impacting all of us in this country."

"I feel like we're never as far as we think," she said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Schools see brain drain of educators following anti-critical race theory protests

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When Rydell Harrison started a new job as a school superintendent in southwestern Connecticut last August, he was excited to join a community that seemed committed to diversity and equity. The Easton, Redding and Region 9 district, which covers two small, mostly white towns, had recently established a task force and allocated money to address the racial climate in schools.

# data[].attributes.headline
Main Source: How Critical Race Theory Went from Harvard Law to Fox News

# data[].attributes.subject
Main Source: How Critical Race Theory Went from Harvard Law to Fox News

# data[].attributes.body
Consider This/NPR episode

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
subscribe to Consider This from NPR podcast

subscribe to Consider This from NPR podcast

Critical race theory is a legal framework developed decades ago at Harvard Law School. It posits that racism is not just the product of individual bias, but is embedded in legal systems and policies. Today, it's become the subject of heated debate on Fox News and in local school board meetings across the country.

Adam Harris, staff writer at The Atlantic, explains why. Harris has traced the debate over critical race theory back decades.

Gloria Ladson-Billings spoke to NPR about watching that debate morph in recent years. She's president of the National Academy of Education and one of the first academics to bring critical race theory to education research.

In participating regions, you'll also hear a local news segment that will help you make sense of what's going on in your community.

Email us at considerthis@npr.org.
This episode was produced by Lee Hale. It was edited by Sami Yenigun and Brent Baughman with help from Leah Donnella. Our executive producer is Cara Tallo.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Critical Race Theory Went From Harvard Law To Fox News : Consider This from NPR

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Critical race theory is a legal framework developed decades ago at Harvard Law School. It posits that racism is not just the product of individual bias, but is embedded in legal systems and policies. Today, it's become the subject of heated debate on Fox News and in local school board meetings across the country.