The Networks Pushing a Divided World: Far-Right Moments in California Schools

• In Event: Education, Power, and Resistance: Networks, Policy, and Practice in Divided Times

Proposal

Introduction
Far-right extremism, encompassing anti-democratic and authoritarian elements, is growing globally (Lührmann et al., 2019; Stenner, 2005). The notion of the “far right” has a longer trajectory–and more conceptual clarity–in countries beyond the U.S. (Castelli Gattinara & Pirro, 2022; Mudde, 2007). In Western Europe, far-right groups have advocated for privatization, school choice, and nativist agendas in education (Berg et al., 2023; Guidici et al., 2024). In the U.S., conservative actors have long pushed for educational reforms that teach Protestant values, unquestioned patriotism, assimilation, parents’ rights, and more recently, free markets (Apple, 2006; Laats, 2015). The current iteration of this movement merges these ideological commitments with anti-democratic tactics like fear, violence, disinformation, and explicitly racist, misogynist, xenophobic, and transphobic ideologies (Brewer & Timberlake, 2024; Cowen, 2024), earning it the label of far right (Mudde, 2007).

This paper examines how far-right coalitions weaponize schools to advance exclusionary, anti-democratic ideologies. We examine the nature of far-right movements in California, a U.S. state considered to be more progressive, yet with growing far-right activity. We build on the long tradition of network analysis within critical policy studies (e.g., Galey-Horn & Ferrare, 2020; Koon, 2020; 2022) to map the activities and collaborations of far-right organizations around key policy issues in schools (e.g., anti-CRT, and anti-LGBQ+ efforts). By understanding the underlying coalitions driving particular policies, and resistance to them, policymakers and educators can work toward a peaceful and equitable society.

Literature Review
Emerging studies that examine far-right organizations in education focus on constituency mobilization organizations like Moms for Liberty, No Left Turn in Education, and Defending Education. These studies describe their use of “parental rights” discourses and unconventional tactics to further White Christian nationalist backlash to educational equity (LoBue & Douglass, 2023; Brewer & Kretchmar, in press). Moms For Liberty, in particular, had an initial but waning impact on school board elections (Sinha et al., 2023). Cowen (2024) describes the major players and their attacks on public education and support of voucher legislation.
These studies trace the discursive bricolage of these policies, and emerging impacts, but we lack an understanding of how national far-right networks, regional networks, and local far-right activity are connected, and how these groups gain traction in states like California. This work illuminates how far-right actors are coordinating to transform school communities into sites of ideological contestation.

Conceptual Framework
We situate our work in critical policy analysis (e.g., Diem at el., 2014), social movements literature (e.g., Castelli Gattinara et al., 2022), and policy network analysis (Au & Ferrare, 2015; Galey-Horn & Ferrare, 2020; Koon, 2020; 2022). In education, within critical policy analysis, a long tradition of network analysis traces the influences of organizations, conservative advocacy groups, and philanthropists, revealing how field contestations over educational policy operate through networked relations and highlighting hidden players who often have outsized influence in shaping education policy (Anderson & Donchik, 2016; Apple, 2006; Buras, 2011; DeBray et al., 2014; Koon, 2020; Kretchmar et al., 2014; Reckhow, 2012; Scott, 2009).

Data and Methods
In this study, we ask: How are far-right groups mobilizing around education and schooling in California? Which groups have emerged? How are they embedded in broader coalitions? We used network ethnography (Ball, 2016) and network analysis (Borgatti et al, 2013) to examine how far-right actors collaborated to advocate for and pass education policies in California. In particular, we conducted a systematic media analysis in March 2024, reviewing 75 news articles identified through a systematic Google News. The goal was to identify the key actors—school board members, advocacy groups, religious organizations, and political figures—actively engaged in education-related conflicts across the state.

This initial scan yielded 75 articles, which we then reviewed to create a seed list of 155 unique actors or organizations. We narrowed this list to 75 far-right actors explicitly active in California. Next, we reviewed the websites of these 75 organizations, documenting all connections with partner actors/organizations that were “one click away,” including linked reports, endorsements, mentions, and funders.

Findings
First, we map the network and identify the most central players in California. Figure 1 shows actors that had at least two connections in the network, and removes “weaker” connections (e.g., mention of another organization on its website). These groups were the highest connected actors in the network, and included both national organizations (Family Research Council, Moms for Liberty) and regional groups (e.g., Californians for Equal Rights Foundation and California Family Council).

Second, we delve deeper into one case to illuminate these dynamics: Temecula Valley. The case offers a microcosm of how far-right organizing is reshaping public education governance. As Figure 2 shows, the school board’s policy changes were not isolated decisions; they were backed by a well-coordinated network of political actors, advocacy groups, and religious organizations working together. The school board members themselves were recruited and supported by conservative PACs and Parent Revolt-style training programs. Local churches and PACs, such as 412 Church and the Inland Empire Family PAC, endorsed and funded these candidates while actively shaping their policy priorities. Far-right social media influencers, including Libs of TikTok and Moms for Liberty, amplified board decisions, turning them into national political issues. Republican state officials, including then-Assemblymember Bill Essayli (R-Riverside), actively supported Temecula’s policies, even proposing state legislation mirroring the district’s actions.

Discussion
In California and in more progressive communities internationally, many may think they are immune to these conflicts; however, there are conservative and moderate districts within California where a network of far-right actors are gaining ground and creating local policies and informal local political cultures that make schools less welcoming and inclusive. This work highlights how schools are not just sites of learning but sites of struggle, sites where peace must be actively defended against coordinated ideological assaults that fracture communities, marginalize students, and undermine democracy itself. We need better tools and guidance for school and district leaders to navigate such conflicts, including tools to trace political networks, resist disinformation, and build inclusive coalitions.

Authors

• Huriya Jabbar, University of Southern California

• Danfeng Soto-Vigil Koon, University of San Francisco

• Daniel Espinoza, University of Southern California