Over the last half-decade, we've seen a sea change in the mores and practices of many universities, cultural institutions, media outlets, and even corporations. Driven by militant and social media–savvy young activists, these institutions have adopted an outlook on issues of race, diversity, gender, and sexual expression that can best be described as Critical Race Theory (CRT). 
 
Originally pioneered by legal academics, CRT was long confined to niche slices of academia. But in the past few years the vocabulary and concepts of CRT have become staples of our public rhetoric and HR idiom, providing us with terms like: "structural racism," "microaggression," "anti-racism," and "implicit bias." Its impact, however, is not limited to new jargon; CRT is also beginning to change policy, in fields such as policing and education.
 
The Manhattan Institute has been a leader in tracking CRT's rise and outlining an agenda to push back. Senior fellow and City Journal contributing editor, Christopher Rufo, has led the way, reporting on CRT within Lockheed Martin, Disney, Raleigh's public school district, and many other places besides. Rufo’s work on the incorporation of CRT into K–12 curricula has drawn the attention of many concerned parents and public leaders, including Montana's own Attorney General, Austin Knudsen, who recently issued an opinion arguing CRT violates the state's non-discrimination provisions. 
 
The question of CRT's impact on our laws, institutions, and norms will not be going away anytime soon. We invite you to a conversation between Rufo and MI president Reihan Salam on CRT's rise and how those interested in maintaining an older ideal of color-blind justice might fight back.
 

communications@manhattan-institute.org