State Lawmakers Are Combating Racism the Right Way. Here’s What You Need to Know. – Heritage.org

Every parent wants toprotecttheir child from prejudice. Yet some activists and writers claim that state lawmakers proposals to reject educators use of critical race theory in K-12 schools is acampaignthat thrives on caricature.

We saw an example of this in a Twitter exchange between the best-selling author Jordan Peterson and the Manhattan Institute Senior Fellow Chris Rufo this week.

Peterson argued that banning critical race theory in schools is a bad idea because ideas are defeated by better ideas. Peterson also added that critical race theory cant be defined or policed.

Rufo, who has documented the ways in which educators application of critical race theory leads to racial discrimination, appropriately responded by saying state proposals that defend teachers and students from these activities must becareful to restrict racialist abuse.Schools have a coercive power over children, Rufo argued.

Also, critical race theory can be defined (its architects left a canon defining its main ideas) and lawmakers are responsible for addressing violations of existing law. The Heritage Foundationsmodel policycontains such careful provisions and prohibits compelled speechwith compelled speech being a natural consequence of school officials applications of critical race theory in classrooms (or anywhere else).

As I explain in my book Splintered: Critical Race Theory and the Progressive War on Truth, critical race theorypromotes racial discriminationand Marxism. One critical race theorist calledKarl Marxs ideasdazzling and riveting to contemporary theorists. Critical race theory has an activist dimension and questions the very foundations of constitutional law, according to two of the theorys founders, Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic.

There is a wave of popular opinion rejecting the theorys biased applications. State lawmakers are considering proposals that defend teachers and students from being forced to believe ideas that clash with their personal values and Americas founding ideals, including ideas thatviolatethe Civil Rights Act of 1964. Here are some examples of proposals that are rejecting racial discrimination, not banning critical race theory:

Criticshave claimed such proposals prevent schools from making people feel discomfort, as though teachers will need to avoid discussing the harsh truths about slavery and racism in Americas past. But the proposals are specific regarding school activities and instructional practices and do not ban black history, as one Florida lawmaker who opposes the state proposal claimed.

Floridas proposal, for example, says that a public employee cannot force a teacher or student to believe that an individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish based on their skin color. The proposal is not an invitation to censor school material but a firm statement opposing racism.

Some school officials know that racially discriminatory behavior will not stand in court. Earlier this week in Massachusetts, Wellesley public school leaders justsettled a lawsuit with Parents Defending Education, an advocacy organization exposing radical content in schools, who argued that the districts racial affinity groups were illegal. These affinity activities separate students by race for different school activities.

State proposals to reject critical race theory should protect teachers and students from prejudice by prohibiting compelled speech, reinforcing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and even stating that nothing in such proposals shall limit classroom discussions (Georgias proposal, for one, contains such a provision).

Before denouncing state proposals for using the words discomfort, guilt, and anguish in relation to K-12 schools, critics should look closer at what lawmakers are attempting to do: protect children from racism.

This piece originally appeared in The Daily Signal

See the article here:

State Lawmakers Are Combating Racism the Right Way. Here's What You Need to Know. - Heritage.org