Journal of Critical Race Inquiry Volume 12, Number 2 (2025) pp. 65-67 BOOK REVIEW: Who Is Antiracist?: Beliefs, Motivations, and Politics, by George Yancey and Hayoung David Oh. Temple University Press, 2025. Book Review Author: Nikta Sadati Queen  s University In Who Is Antiracist?, sociologists George Yancey and Hayoung David Oh create and test an antiracism attitude scale, a first of its kind survey to explore the common beliefs and demographic factors among antiracists in the United States. Through their exploration of   popularized antiracism   (6)  an activist-focused philosophy that arose from within the movement for Black Lives (BLM) responding to escalating racial tensions and anti-Black violence in 2020   Yancey and Oh offer an incredibly valuable first step in what they hope to be a global, systematic overview of what it means to be an advocate of antiracism and the potential future of the movement in an increasingly polarized America. Between its Introduction and Conclusion, the book is divided into five chapters that follow the process through which Yancey and Oh create, test, and expand their antiracism attitude scale. Who Is Antiracist? is an   incomplete picture   (6) that, amongst other sociological research throughout the years targeted towards the definition of activist movements in America, is a   necessary component of a comprehensive effort to understand not only the current racial climate of the U.S. but also how racial conflict may play out in the coming years   (5).  In Chapter Two, Yancey and Oh explore the origins of antiracism and address the current tensions in the United States surrounding Critical Race Theory (CRT). Yancey and Oh note that though antiracism,   represents the practical application of the theoretical ideals promulgated by CRT   (14), they are not interchangeable terms. Indeed, Yancey and Oh present multiple varieties of antiracism, tying the philosophy to the Afro-modern tradition and Marxism. Yancey and Oh argue that antiracism   can be envisioned as a replacement for Marxism  s revolutionary potential,   describing the two philosophies as sharing   a similar goal of displacing an oppressive class   (19). Yancey and Oh note that concerns of toleration or micro-level attitudes of the majority group have proven   insufficient  , particularly in the wake of political unrest arising from the more widely reported murders of Trayvon Martin, George Floyd, and Breonna Taylor. Instead, Yancey and Oh characterize popularized antiracism as fighting for the radical institutional and systematic restructuring of society.  In Chapter Three, Yancey and Oh investigate how the proponents of antiracism define their common goals when advocating for antiracism through their survey and   antiracism attitude scale   (28). Through a literature review of books which were popular amongst advocates of antiracism in late 2020 and early 2021  such as Ibram X. Kendi  s 2019 text, How to Be An Antiracist  Yancey and Oh determine what they call the   four themes of antiracism: 1) pervasiveness of racism, 2) racism is multifaceted, 3) societal change, and 4) differential white/nonwhite responsibilities   (31). It is the last theme that  REVIEW: WHO IS ANTIRACIST?  66  members of the majority group (whites) raise objections to even when considering advocating against racism. As Yancey and Oh argue,   antiracism is not a philosophy that promotes identical responsibilities for whites and nonwhites   (37). For someone who sees equality as the answer  as opposed to equity  this theme would certainly be a point of contention.  With these four themes derived from the literature review, Yancey and Oh begin constructing and testing their antiracism attitude scale. The survey consists of 13 statements for which respondents can select responses ranging from   Strongly disagreed   to   Strongly agreed   (41). Included among these statements, all related to one of the four common themes of antiracism, are:   3. America is basically a racist society  ,   7. The norms of white supremacy do not have much influence in the United States,   and   13. A person can be a non-racist without actively fighting against racism   (41). Respondents who score high on the scale are most likely to be advocates for antiracism. From this survey of 397 paid respondents, among those who scored high on the scale, at least a third of respondents (n=31) reflected each of the four themes in their answers (46). Based on these results, Yancey and Oh end Chapter Three with confidence in their   viable index   with which they can   measure popularized antiracism in modern society   (49). In Chapter Four, Yancey and Oh   investigate the social and demographic characteristics of antiracists and some of their social attitudes   (50) by expanding their focus to the national scale and working with the annual Chapman Survey of American Fears (CSAF). Yancey and Oh include five of the thirteen core statements from the previous chapter in the national survey, which include statements like,   Overall, the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement has been bad for the United States   (52) and   Over the past few years, Blacks have gotten less than they deserve. (BLACKS DESERVE)   (41). It  s unclear why Yancey and Oh chose to write   Blacks   rather than   Black people   in their statements on the survey; this language affects the overall tone of supportive statements, perhaps creating an unintended limitation to their results. In terms of significant demographic factors, findings confirmed that gender, racial identity, political viewpoint, education levels, and income remain significant factors that correlate with whether or not one aligns themselves with the philosophy of antiracism (59). It is also revealed that   there is more variability based on political ideology than on race   (60). In fact, for Yancey and Oh, being antiracist seems to be emerging as a political identity in the United States,   due to the political polarization in this nation   (68), with those who identify with antiracism also aligning themselves with the progressive arm of the Democratic Party. If antiracism is a political identity, how does it contend with issues that are not inherently racial? In Chapter Five, Yancey and Oh attempt to answer this question by comparing two groups from the CSAF    those who are   highly   antiracist (27.1%) and strong political progressives (44.7%)    in eight areas:   1) overt racial issues, 2) partisan political attitudes, 3) political issues  January 6, 4) political issues  environmentalism, 5) attitudes toward COVID, 6) political issues  economy, 7) foreign policy concerns, and 8) criminal justice concerns   (74). The results reveal that antiracists seemed to be more concerned with environmentalism and less concerned with foreign policy fears. Yancey and Oh see these results as a sign of the partisan loyalty amongst antiracist advocates that may, in a polarized America, be the movement  s biggest limitation. To investigate this partisan  REVIEW: WHO IS ANTIRACIST?  67  loyalty further, in Chapter Six, Yancey and Oh perform web analyses of antiracist approaches to five seemingly nonracial political issues in the U.S.: climate change, abortion, January 6, street crime, and inflation, through a content analysis of various websites. Yancey and Oh found that issues relating to the Democratic platform (climate change, January 6, and abortion) are overwhelmingly more of a focus for antiracists than Republican platform issues (street crime and inflation) (111).  In the conclusion of Who Is Antiracist?, Yancey and Oh see both longevity and a limited scope for antiracism:   it is fair to state that antiracists are not going away any time soon,   however, antiracist support and power seems to lie   on the blue side for some time to come   (117). As for what this means for the future, Yancey and Oh determine that when the Democrats have political power, they may pass laws and changes that would be in the interest of antiracist advocates, yet the polarization of the country would result in the reversal of these very changes as soon as the political power changes. Americans can already see this with Trump  s actions to reverse abortion laws, gender rights, and DEI progress. Yancey and Oh attempt to provide possible solutions for the polarization, including working with the Republican School Choice movement to create schools that teach antiracist curriculum. Of course, Yancey and Oh recognize the limitations in attempting to be centrist with this solution; the strongest limitation here is that popularized antiracism does not seek to change only some people  s opinions. The parents who would send their children to a school with antiracist curriculum would already believe in many of the philosophies of antiracism; therefore, no real change is occurring. Ultimately, in the conclusion of this text, Yancey and Oh seem to lose hope in a unified, national conversation on antiracist principles and advocacy. In their own words,   [i]n a polarized society, few partisan groups can appeal across the political barrier, and we have little reason to think that, absent a tremendous effort by antiracists to develop a more bipartisan approach, they will be an exception to that trend   (124). Despite this projection, Yancey and Oh emphasize future possibilities for research on antiracist activism, calling for future research to improve their antiracism scale and its intersectional possibilities.  With Who Is Antiracist?, Yancey and Oh open the door to quantitative analysis of the identity and beliefs of antiracist advocates through the creation of their antiracism scale and use of national surveys. For sociologists, critical race theorists, and postcolonial and political science scholars, this text offers statistical data that is effective in analyzing the real-time transformations of racial issues and activism. For activists and antiracists, this text offers a variety of characteristics and goals through which one can consider the meaning of antiracism today and what current antiracist visions have for the future of the United States.