The affective moralization of educational policy discourse: insights from the case of Critical Race Theory bans

This article examines the moralization of educational policy debates in the United States, focusing on recent campaigns to ban Critical Race Theory (CRT). Once an academic framework for analyzing race, law, and power, CRT has become a polarizing symbol in several state legislatures, school boards, and public discourse. Drawing on scholarship on moralization and affect, I argue that the traction of CRT bans lies not only in partisan mobilization but in processes of affective moralization, namely, the framing of educational policy issues as moral imperatives infused with emotional intensity. Emotions such as fear, outrage, and resentment amplify moral claims, transforming curricular disputes into existential battles over identity, belonging, and national values. By theorizing affective moralization, this article extends existing scholarship on moralization in educational policy, demonstrating how affect and moralization are mutually reinforcing. The analysis highlights both the scholarly importance and the democratic risks of moralized policy discourse in education.