Document Type
Article
Publication Date
1-11-2024
Department 1
Political Science
Abstract
Critical Race Theory (CRT) has become a flashpoint of elite political discord, yet how Americans actually perceive CRT is unclear. We theorize that Republican elites utilized a strong framing strategy to re-define CRT as an “empty signifier” representing broader racial and cultural grievances. Using a survey and a pre-registered experiment among U.S. adults (N = 19,060), we find that this strategy worked. Republicans exhibit more familiarity with CRT and hold more negatively valenced (and wide ranging) sentiments toward CRT, relative to Democrats. Moreover, compared to teaching the legacy of racism in schools, Republicans are significantly more opposed to teaching CRT while Democrats express greater uncertainty. Our findings suggest that by framing CRT as a broad term that envelopes many grievances (including those beyond the scope of CRT), Republican elites have shaped a subset of Americans’ understanding of and attitudes toward CRT.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
DOI
10.1017/rep.2023.39
Version
Version of Record
Recommended Citation
Safarpour, Alauna, Kristin Lunz Trujillo, Jon Green, Caroline High Pippert, Jennifer Lin, and James N Druckman. “Divisive or Descriptive?: How Americans Understand Critical Race Theory.” The Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics 9, no. 1 (2024): 157–81.
Required Publisher's Statement
This article is available from the publisher’s website.
Included in
American Politics Commons, Political Theory Commons, Race and Ethnicity Commons, Race, Ethnicity and Post-Colonial Studies Commons