In the context of newly emerging racial backlash with implications for colorblind ideology, the authors explore understandings of race and racism among white students at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). They build on Bonilla-Silva’s four frames of colorblind ideology and describe a fifth—the disconnected power-analysis frame. Interviews with 18 white students across three HBCUs revealed that this frame allows students with a limited but growing awareness of racial inequality to more strategically engage with and benefit from an environment where race is salient, while preserving white privilege in the process. The findings underscore the enduring significance of colorblind frames and the need for continued vigilance in naming covert race-coded language that perpetuates white supremacy.

Francisco "Did affirmative action and the diversity rationale move us backwards?" This question is often posed to invoke a discussion about lessons from affirmative action and social science support for the diversity rationale. Yet, the question itself is polarizing by virtue of offering only two divergent paths. On the "yes" side are grassroots organizations, and critical race, legal, and educational scholars who critique the efficacy of working inside historically racist legal parameters; on the "no" side, those engaged in diversity rationale scholarship focused on the societal and educational benefits of a racially diverse student body and others aligned with political lawyers and institutional practitioners supporting affirmative action. As a consequence, while neoconservatives work hand-in-hand to advance legal arguments grounded in problematic notions of meritocracy and colorblindness, advocates for racial justice are divided. Given that the educational benefits of diversity are no longer being legally contested and affirmative action continues to undergo policy retrenchments that limit its utility, problematizing the disconnect is not as much about this specific area of research or the future defense of __________________ This analysis is based on work supported by postdoctoral fellowship grants from the National Academy of Education/ Spencer Foundation and from the Ford Foundation. The views expressed herein are not necessarily those of the National Academy of Education, the Spencer Foundation, the Ford Foundation, or anyone other than the authors. Uma Jayakumar thanks Patricia Gurin and James Jackson for their mentorship and support during these fellowships and beyond.

In the context of ongoing antagonism on college campuses, attacks on Critical Race Theory, and widespread backlash against racial justice initiatives, this paper underscores the growing need to recognize co-optation and other counterinsurgent strategies used against racial justice to make room for transformative scholarship. By presenting qualitative interviews from 15 white HBCU students, we illustrate how diversity research, advocacy, and organizing previously used to advocate for racial justice has instead constructed distorted understandings of race and racism and has been used to expand ideologies of whiteness. The findings show what CRT scholars have cautioned about for decades—when left uninterrupted, ahistorical approaches to racial diversity programming and research may lend to the co-optation of justice-focused diversity language and the appropriation of BIPOC strategies of resistance. This not only inhibits and detracts from racial justice work, but can function to expand white supremacy. We relate these narratives to an emerging racial backlash whereby white people attempt to distort understandings of structural racism to claim a “persecuted” status—a delusion that we argue warrants a new ideological frame. We posit this work lays the foundation for advancing equity in one of the most counterinsurgent eras in higher education (Matias & Newlove, 2017).

No abstract

No abstract