GROUP OF STATE REPUBLICAN
LAWMAKERS INTRODUCED LEGISLATION
THAT WOULD PROHIBIT PUBLIC
SCHOOLS THE UW AND TECH COLLEGES
FROM TEACHING CRITICAL RACE
THEORY, A DECADES OLD ACADEMIC
THEORY THAT HOLDS THAT RACISM IS
SYSTEMATIC, BUILT INTO SOCIETAL
INSTITUTIONS SINCE THE DAYS OF
SLAVERY.
GLORIA LADSON-BILLINGS IS ONE OF
THE ACADEMICS WHO FIRST APPLIED
THE CRITICAL RACE THEORY TO HER
EDUCATION POLICY RESEARCH.
SHE'S A PROFESSOR AT UW-MADISON
AND NOW THE PRESIDENT OF THE
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF EDUCATION.
BUT HOW DOES CRITICAL RACE
THEORY CROSS OVER INTO TODAY'S
POLITICS?
TO THAT, WE ASK EMERITUS
PROFESSOR JOHN WITTE, A POLICY
EXPERT WHO SAYS THE CONCEPT IS
WIDELY MISUNDERSTOOD.
AND THEY BOTH JOIN US NOW AND
THANKS FOR BEING HERE.
>> WELCOME.
>> A PLEASURE.
>> WELL, FIRST TO YOU, PROFESSOR
BILLINGS, WHAT IS CRITICAL RACE
THEORY?
>> IT IS AN ATTEMPT TO BEGIN TO
UNDERSTAND RACIAL DISPARITY.
IF YOU LOOK OVER THE HISTORY OF
THE NATION, WE STARTED OUT IN
1600 UP INTO THE MID 20TH
CENTURY LITERALLY SAYING THAT
THE REASON THAT THERE WERE
RACIAL DISPARITIES IS BECAUSE
THERE WERE BIOLOGICAL AND
INTELLECTUAL DEFICIENCIES.
WE'VE FINALLY PUT THAT MYTH TO
REST AND IT'S FALLEN OUT OF
FAVOR.
I WOULD SAY IN THE NEXT FEW
YEARS WE BEGAN TO LOOK AT ISSUES
OF EQUAL OPPORTUNITY.
SO WE HAD THE BROWN DECISION.
CERTAINLY WE HAD RECONSTRUCTION,
WE HAD THE BROWN DECISION, THE
CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT, THE
VOTING RIGHTS ACT.
SO WE'VE HAD OPPORTUNITIES.
BUT THEY ALL GET ROLLED BACK.
WE CAN SHOW YOU CLEARLY IN THE
HISTORY OF THE NATION THAT WE
ROLL THOSE BACK.
SO CRITICAL RACE THEORY IS YET
ANOTHER WAY TO THINK ABOUT HOW
DO WE UNDERSTAND RACIAL
DISPARITY.
>> SO WISCONSIN U.S.
REPRESENTATIVE GLEN GROTHMAN HAS
INTRODUCED A BILL BANNING ITS
TEACHING SAYING THE PURPOSE OF
THIS RETELLING OF AMERICAN
HISTORY IS TO TO TRY TO SET
AMERICAN AGAINST AMERICAN HE
SAYS AND THAT QUOTE THE CRT
CURRICULUM THAT ENLIGHTENED
EDUCATORS TEACHES OUR CHILDREN
TO HATE EACH OTHER AND OUR
COUNTRY MEN.
THERE ARE NO BOGEYMAN HOLDING
PEOPLE BACK.
PROFESSOR LADSON-BILLINGS, WHAT
IS YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT?
>> THE BOOGEYMAN IS THAT CRT IS
IN K-12 SCHOOLS.
IT'S THERE AS MUCH AS UNICORNS
ARE THERE.
IT'S NOT IN THE CURRICULUM.
I WOULD ADVISE REPRESENTATIVE
GROTHMAN TO GO UP BASCOM HILL
AND LOOK AT THE PLAQUE ABOUT
SIFTING AND WINNOWING THAT SAYS
THIS IS A STATE THAT WILL NOT
PROHIBIT THE SEARCH FOR THE
TRUTH.
THEY DIDN'T WANT PROFESSOR ELY
IN THE 1800s TO TEACH
SOCIALISM.
I'M VERY HARTENED BY THE FACT
THAT WE HAD THE JOINT CHIEFS OF
STAFF GENERAL SAY THE OTHER DAY
THAT HE HAD READ LENIN AND MARX.
IT DIDN'T MAKE HIM A COMMUNIST.
>> DID CRITICAL RACE THEORY
TEACH TO HATE WHITE PEOPLE?
>> ABSOLUTELY NOT.
IN SEVERAL OF THE INTERVIEWS
THAT I HAVE DONE BEFORE I'VE
DONE INTERVIEWS WITH PRINT
REPORTERS, I'VE SENT THEM
ARTICLES I'VE WRITTEN AND THEN
WHEN THEY CONTACT ME, I SAID,
WHAT IN THE ARTICLE SAYS THAT
YOU SHOULD HATE WHITE PEOPLE.
THEY ALL AGREE, IT'S NOT THERE.
IT IS NOT THERE.
>> PROFESSOR WITTE, WE KNOW THAT
PRESIDENT TRUMP BANNED ANY
FEDERAL TRAINING IN CRITICAL
RACE THEORY, WHITE PRIVILEGE OR
OTHER WHAT HE CALLED POP PROPAGANDA.
WAS THAT DIRECTLY THE GENESIS OF
POLITICIZING CRITICAL RACE
THEORY?
>> OH, YES, IT WAS, THAT AND
JANUARY 6.
STARTS WITH JANUARY 6 AND THEN
TRUMP GETS INVOLVED.
BUT THERE ARE MISUNDERSTANDINGS
ABOUT WHAT IT MEANS, I THINK.
WHILE GLORIA HAS LAID IT OUT
ACCURATELY, DIFFERENT PEOPLE
INTERPRET IT DIFFERENTLY.
SO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE
PROPONENTS OF IT, THEY POINT TO
THE HISTORIC ORIGINS OF IT,
SLAVERY, AND THEY ALSO ARGUE
THAT IT'S STILL A PRESENT
PROBLEM NOW WITH INEQUITIES.
THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE
OPPONENTS SAY THAT THERE'S A
BLAME GAME HERE, THAT THE
CURRENT GENERATION IS SOMEHOW TO
BLAME FOR WHAT HAPPENED
HISTORICALLY AND IT'S THEIR
RESPONSIBILITY TO RECTIFY IT.
THAT'S WHERE YOU GET THE HUGE
DIVIDE AND YOU GET THE VERY
STRIDENT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
THOSE POSITIONS.
>> SO WHAT SHOULD WE MAKE OF THE
WAY THAT PROPOSALS TO BAN
CRITICAL RACE THEORY AS A SCHOOL
SUBJECT ARE SWEEPING THE NATION?
>> WELL, MY VIEW HAS BEEN THAT
BECAUSE OF THE DIFFERENCES IN
OPINION WHAT IT MEANS, YOU
SHOULD BE VERY GINGER ABOUT
TEACHING IT.
I WOULD NOT INTRODUCE IT TO
ELEMENTARY STUDENTS OR EVEN
MIDDLE SCHOOLS.
I DO THINK IT SHOULD BE
INTRODUCED IN HIGH SCHOOLS
BECAUSE IT'S ALL OVER THE NEWS.
IT'S GOING TO BE ALL OVER THIS
SHOW TONIGHT.
AND I HOPE THAT THERE ARE SOME
HIGH SCHOOL KIDS OUT THERE
WATCHING AND READING THOSE
THINGS.
I THINK THERE YOU CAN DISCUSS IT
IN A REASONABLE MANNER.
YOU GOT TO APPROACH IT IN A
GINGERLY MANNER BECAUSE YOU CAN
GET VERY BAD FEELINGS ON BOTH
SIDES, AFRICAN-AMERICANS AND
WHITE PEOPLE.
>> REPRESENTATIVE
LAWSON-BILLINGS, IS IT PART OF
SCHOOL CURRICULUM NOW?
<!32768> IT IS NOT.
I WOULD NOT INTRODUCE IT IN HIGH
SCHOOL.
IT'S A THEER RYE.
THEORY.
WHO NEEDS THEORY?
GRADUATE STUDENTS.
I NEVER INTRODUCED IT EVEN TO
UNDERGRADUATES.
I WORKED WITH GRADUATE STUDENTS
WHO ARE LOOKING FOR A
THEORETICAL FRAME TO BOLSTER AN
ARGUMENT AND THAT'S WHERE IT
RESIDES.
>> PROFESSOR WITTE, YOU HAVE
SAID A DIFFERENT TERM ALTOGETHER
SHOULD BE USED TO DISCUSS RACIAL
DISPARITIES.
WHY?
>> I WOULD DROP CRITICAL RACE
THEORY AND FIND OTHER TERMS TO
DEAL WITH IT, HOWEVER THEY WANT
TO PHRASE IT.
I DON'T THINK -- I DISAGREE WITH
GLORIA HERE.
I DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD AVOID
IT.
NOW, THAT'S PART MY WHAT I DO.
I BRING -- MY WHOLE CAREER I
BROUGHT IN THE MOST
CONTROVERSIAL THINGS I COULD
FIND.
WE TALKED ABOUT ABORTION AT THE
UNDERGRADUATE LEVEL, VERY HEATED
ISSUES.
I STUDIED EDUCATIONAL VOUCHERS,
VERY HEATED ISSUE IN THE
EDUCATION WORLD.
I TALKED ABOUT IT
STRAIGHTFORWARD AND BOTH SIDES
GIVEN.
I THINK THE SAME THING SHOULD
HAPPEN HERE.
YOU HAVE TO BE VERY SENSITIVE TO
DOING IT.
I AGREE WITH HER THERE.
I AGREE WITH THAT.
BECAUSE YOU GOT TO ALWAYS WATCH
THE FACES OF PEOPLE TO SEE WHO'S
BEING HARMED AND WHO'S GETTING
VERY ANGRY.
YOU CAN TELL THAT IN THE
CLASSROOM.
YOU CAN SEE IT AND WATCH FOR
THAT.
>> I WANT TO ASK ONE LAST
QUESTION QUICKLY OF YOU,
PROFESSOR BILLINGS.
APART FROM THE BROUHAHA OVER
CRITICAL RACE THEORY, WHAT IS
THE IMPORTANCE OF TEACHING
CULTURALLY ACCURATE HISTORY?
>> I'VE BEEN VERY FORTUNATE THAT
WE HAVE JUST PUT OUT A REPORT ON
CIVIC DISCOURSE AND CIVIC
REASONING.
THAT'S THE PLACE WHERE I THINK
WE HAVE TO GO AS A NATION.
AS JOHN MENTIONED, JANUARY 6
SHOWED US CLEARLY WE DON'T KNOW
HOW TO SIT DOWN AND TALK WHEN WE
DISAGREE.
SO THAT'S THE WORK THAT WE HAVE
TO DO, IS FIGURE OUT HOW DO WE
HAVE CIVIL DISCOURSE, EVEN WHEN
WE DON'T SEE THE WORLD THE SAME
WAY.
>> WE NEED TO LEAVE IT THERE.
PROFESSORS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR YOUR