
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Over the past few years, America’s schools have become a battleground in our national politics. Debates about how we teach history and explore issues of race in school have become flashpoints at every level, from school boards to the Oval Office.
And there’s one phrase that’s become particularly attached to this tension: “critical race theory.”
Those three words have catapulted from the depths of legal academia into the center of partisan politics. But as Danielle Holley-Walker, dean of Howard University Law School and American Council on Education Fellow at Brown University, explains on this episode of Trending Globally, what people today are describing as critical race theory has little to do with its original meaning. And misappropriation of the phrase isn’t just a careless mistake; its use (and misuse) is part of a calculated backlash against social movements that have gained momentum in recent years.
On this episode, Sarah talks with Danielle about how the phrase has transformed from a complex legal concept into a conservative talking point, and what that transformation can tell us about race, education, and politics in America today.
Read the New Yorker’s 2021 profile of Christopher Rufo.
Learn more about the Watson Institute’s other podcasts.
4.9
7676 ratings
Over the past few years, America’s schools have become a battleground in our national politics. Debates about how we teach history and explore issues of race in school have become flashpoints at every level, from school boards to the Oval Office.
And there’s one phrase that’s become particularly attached to this tension: “critical race theory.”
Those three words have catapulted from the depths of legal academia into the center of partisan politics. But as Danielle Holley-Walker, dean of Howard University Law School and American Council on Education Fellow at Brown University, explains on this episode of Trending Globally, what people today are describing as critical race theory has little to do with its original meaning. And misappropriation of the phrase isn’t just a careless mistake; its use (and misuse) is part of a calculated backlash against social movements that have gained momentum in recent years.
On this episode, Sarah talks with Danielle about how the phrase has transformed from a complex legal concept into a conservative talking point, and what that transformation can tell us about race, education, and politics in America today.
Read the New Yorker’s 2021 profile of Christopher Rufo.
Learn more about the Watson Institute’s other podcasts.
1,020 Listeners
4,329 Listeners
104 Listeners
146 Listeners
54 Listeners
782 Listeners
592 Listeners
55 Listeners
2,188 Listeners
1,478 Listeners
86 Listeners
347 Listeners
3,383 Listeners
390 Listeners
289 Listeners