Free Speech

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey Donates $10 Million to Ibram X. Kendi, Who Wants To Make Racism Unconstitutional

"This research will inform and fuel much needed and overdue policy change."

|

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey announced on Thursday that he was donating $10 million to Boston University's Center for Antiracist Research, a project recently launched by the antiracist scholar Ibram X. Kendi.

Kendi is the author of the 2019 book How to Be An Antiracist, one of two books that attracted renewed attention following the death of George Floyd. (The other is Robin DiAngelo's White Fragility.) In a tweet, he thanked Dorsey for the grant, which came with "no strings attached."

Dorsey replied that he hoped the center's research would inform and fuel "much needed and overdue policy change."

The CEO of Twitter is more than welcome to spend his financial resources however he sees fit. He can give money to anyone he wants, for any reason. But since Kendi intends to have an impact on public policy—and since these funds presumably will help Kendi fulfill his goals—it's worth scrutinizing what kinds of policy changes he has in mind.

In a 2019 piece for POLITICO magazine, Kendi proposed a constitutional amendment that would prohibit racism. Here is his idea in full:

To fix the original sin of racism, Americans should pass an anti-racist amendment to the U.S. Constitution that enshrines two guiding anti-racist principals: Racial inequity is evidence of racist policy and the different racial groups are equals. The amendment would make unconstitutional racial inequity over a certain threshold, as well as racist ideas by public officials (with "racist ideas" and "public official" clearly defined). It would establish and permanently fund the Department of Anti-racism (DOA) comprised of formally trained experts on racism and no political appointees. The DOA would be responsible for preclearing all local, state and federal public policies to ensure they won't yield racial inequity, monitor those policies, investigate private racist policies when racial inequity surfaces, and monitor public officials for expressions of racist ideas. The DOA would be empowered with disciplinary tools to wield over and against policymakers and public officials who do not voluntarily change their racist policy and ideas.

Such an amendment would constitute a brazen assault on the principles of a free society. Kendi would like to empower a team of government bureaucrats who are beyond even the normal accountability of the political process. Their job would be to investigate both public and private racism, and "monitor public officials for expressions of racist ideas." Kendi's promise that what constitutes a "racist idea" would be "clearly defined" is hardly reassuring: There's no way such a department could avoid becoming an Orwellian nightmare—indeed, the very program would necessitate the formation of a kind of speech police.

This isn't just a bad idea—it's one of the worst ideas ever. Inez Stepman of the Independent Women's Forum called it "woke Stalinism," and she's not even really exaggerating. Under Kendi's proposal, the government would investigate people for making allegedly racist statements, or causing allegedly racial inequities.

The center will probably work on other projects as well. "Kendi's vision for the center calls for multidisciplinary research and policy teams," explained Boston University in a press release. "Researchers across BU, from the law, social work, the humanities, computer science, communications, and medicine and public health, will collaborate with researchers from other universities, as well as data analysts, journalists, advocates, and policy experts."

But it's discouraging to see so much money being spent at least partly in service of a cause that would vastly grow the government's power and gravely undermine free speech—if not destroy it entirely. Dorsey can set whatever speech rules he wants for Twitter: going after the First Amendment is a different and much more serious matter.

NEXT: Lyft, Uber Get Last-Minute Reprieve Before They Would Have Canceled Services in California

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new…JYt after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.

    Here’s what I do…..>>…..> Click here

    1. What race are you, Alexis-bot. You might be making too much money.

      1. I am making $165 an hour working from home. i was greatly surprised at the same time as my neighbour advised me she changed into averaging $ninety five however I see the way it works now.KAW I experience masses freedom now that i’m my non-public boss. that is

        what I do………………Money90

      2. job opportunity for everyone! Work from comfort of your home, on your computer And you cAn work with your own working hours. You cAn work this job As A pArt time or As A full time job. You cAn eArn from 65$ An hour to 100$ A dAy! There is no limitAtions, it All depends from you And how much you wAnt to eArn eAch dAy….… CLICK HERE FOR MORE DETAILS

  2. Racial inequity is evidence of racist policy and the different racial groups are equals.

    The NBA is racist. I knew it.

    1. Exactly; look at the relative percentages of their players to the population.
      No other explanation but pure naked racism.

      1. I basically make about $12,000-$18,000 a month online. It’s enough to comfortably replace my I was amazed how easy it was after I tried it .CPo This is what I’ve been doing old jobs income, especially considering I only work about 10-13 hours a week from home……..

        ===========► Click here

  3. To fix the original sin of racism

    Fuck you.

      1. I basically make about $12,000-$18,000 a month online. It’s enough to comfortably replace my I was amazed how easy it was after I tried it .NFl This is what I’ve been doing old jobs income, especially considering I only work about 10-13 hours a week from home……..

        ===========► Click here

    1. ^Exactly.

      There is one person who judges me for my sins, you aren’t him. Don’t send men to my door. If you do, don’t expect an answer from them.

  4. Translation: Jack Dorsey donates $10 million to Democrats’ political campaigns while skirting campaign finance laws.

    1. Pretty much.

    2. And what’s wrong with that? I thought libertarians were against campaign finance laws.

      1. I’m against campaign finance laws. Also against financing campaigns.

      2. Jack Dorsey is a leftist. I thought leftists were for campaign finance laws.

        1. I thought leftists were for campaign finance laws.

          I also thought they were against specifically the wealthy being allowed to skirt the law.

          1. I am now making extra $19k or more every month from home by doing very simple and easy job online from home. I have received exactly $20845 last month from this home job.TGb Join now this job and start making extra cash online by follow instruction on the given website.

            This is what I do……, Click here

        2. Leftists are for anything that benefits leftists. Period. If that means simultaneously taking the exact opposite position to hamstring a non leftist, then so be it.

          To be a leftist you to be able to agree with two conflicting arguments at the same time.

      3. We’re against hypocritical twat waffles.

      4. I’m against hypocrisy.

  5. So we no longer have to pretend twitter was ever acting in good faith?

    1. Twitter acting in good faith is not pretense; it is fantasy.

  6. Let’s not dismiss this proposed amendment too hastily. Indeed, it might even work to the benefit of us Koch / Reason libertarians. Since all opposition to our open borders agenda is inherently racist, making “border enforcement” advocacy illegal is at least worth considering.

    #ImmigrationAboveAll

    1. Furthermore, this proposal is not radically different from one of Reason contributor Noah Berlatsky’s best ideas: voting for Drumpf is unconstitutional.

      #BringBackBerlatsky

      1. Reason contributor huh. Why am I not surprised.

        1. Weird how none of the Reason contributors ever move right but they do seem to move left with glee.

      2. Wow, he flat out lied five times in the first two paragraphs. I wonder if that was a resume piece for the NYT?

      3. The NLRB can invalidate political office elections that select the wrong people.
        Wow, that’s a take so hot that it makes Eta Carinae look like an ice cube. I’ve lost a lot of my faith in democracy as a tool for guaranteeing freedom but hot damn, that’s some ultra turbo Orwell shit right there.

        It has to be a joke. No one could possibly believe that imprisoning people for voting incorrectly could possibly be right thing to do. Most dictatorships on Earth today at least have the decency (yes the decency) to simply remove undesirables from the ballot or just falsify the ballot counts.

        1. Or poison political opponents…

        2. And the fucknut suggests the old stupid idea of “Court Packing”.

          Boy, I bet all the people who keep suggesting that are going to be really sad if Trump wins and takes them up on the idea.

  7. It would establish and permanently fund the Department of Anti-racism (DOA) comprised of formally trained experts on racism and no political appointees.

    Every bureaucrat’s wet dream.

    1. The Center for Antiracist Research is just masturbation anyway. Gotta have a fantasy to go with it.

      1. It is, hopefully, unlikely to be implemented, but most people do not try to make their dark fantasies a legal reality.

    2. I think this proposed Amendment is DOA.

      1. “I think this proposed Amendment is DOA.”

        I see what you did there.

  8. Time to cancel Jack Dorsey. Sorry Robbe, but just as advocacy of racism is unacceptable, advocacy of mass censorship is likewise unacceptable. Having the right to advocate something does not mean that it is right to advocate it.

    Dorsey is a prime advocate of cancellation, it’s time to turn the tables on him.

    1. Does that mean I have to go create a Twitter account so I can delete it?

    2. “Sorry, Robbie”?

      Robby Soave’s blog post above argues that Dorsey’s contribution to Kendi is a bad idea.

      1. Let’s give some people the benefit of the doubt. Unless you are utterly disillusioned, this proposal will have you seeing red to the point that it’s difficult to comprehend subtlety smaller than an atom bomb.

    3. Dorsey’s just making sure he’ll be a house slave under the new system.

  9. “racist ideas by public officials (with “racist ideas” and “public official” clearly defined)”
    “comprised of formally trained experts on racism and no political appointees”
    “The DOA would be responsible for preclearing all local, state and federal public policies to ensure they won’t yield racial inequity”

    Good grief the guy is naive and gullible, plus probably stupid to boot.

    1. In 2004, Kendi received dual Bachelor of Science degrees in African American Studies and magazine production from Florida A&M University. In 2007, Kendi earned an M.A. and in 2010 a PhD in African American Studies from Temple University.[10] Kendi’s dissertation was titled “The Black Campus Movement: An Afrocentric Narrative History of the Struggle to Diversify Higher Education, 1965-1972.” His advisor was Ama Mazama.[1

      Just goes to show, years of school and a pile of mediocre credentials and he’s still an idiot.

      1. Inside every progressive is a totalitarian struggling to break free. This is Kendi. A totalitarian wannabe.

      2. The number of letters after a name is in inverse proportion to common sense.

        1. Depends on the field.

          1. For example most Agronomist and Animals Scientist I know with PhDs have tons of common sense.

      3. Bachelor of Science in African American Studies? Is that a joke Florida A&M? Do you also give out science degrees for music and art?

      4. PhD.

        Piled higher and Deeper.

      5. How do you get a bachelor of SCIENCE in african american studies? There is zero science in that field.

        1. It’s non-racist science opposed to that racist STEMS type science white people do.

      6. No joke. He’s really highly credentialed in a thoroughly non-academic field.

  10. Funny considering Dorsey made his money selling ads next to racist sexist and other abusive tweets. But the twitter mob is right up this assholes alley for enforcing and shaming.

  11. Trump asks Supreme Court to let him block critics on Twitter

    https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/512938-trump-asks-supreme-court-to-let-him-block-critics-on-twitter

    El Presidente Twitter Man

    1. 0/10

  12. In an odd coincidence I submitted the paper work to vote on making Roman numerical surnames unconstitutional

    1. “Kendi” isn’t as Roman numeral, and the X is simply the initial for his middle name, Xolani

      Not that the NOI-style surnames are Roman numerals either…

  13. Dorsey should instead donate money to MIT to develop a time machine, and then send hordes of woke warriors back to 1950? 1875? 1861? 1776? 1619? 1492? to prevent the original sin of the invention of slavery in the USA. In fact they should cover all these dates and more, and keep feeding SJWs into the machine until we see evidence of righteous change.

    1. Just paint “time machine” on the side of a woodchipper.

      1. Set up expeditions and archaeological digs in places like Cabo San Lucas, various points along the French and Italian Riviera, discover previously undiscovered proof of racial intermingling, declare success.

      2. You’re being awfully bold for someone in prosecutin’ distance.

    2. Bill and Ted to the rescue.

      Sounds right for 2020.

  14. The huckster bastard in me always wanted to move to Texas and start a cult. These activist assholes managed to do it better than I could have, without having to handle snakes, quote scripture, or leave their couches.

    1. All the best cult leaders, like Jim Jones and Shoko Asahara, preached progressive values and recruited many devotees with doctorates in nuclear physics, chemistry and philosophy.

      You’d be better off recruiting at Berkeley or MIT than Texas.

      1. I heard it referred to as the Kelly Bundy Effect. People can only hold so much knowledge. If you cram too much higher education in there, you have to give up something basic like common sense.

  15. That’s quite an atonement. I wonder what @jack is preemptively making up for with this.

    1. Probably just “being born white”, in which case no amount of money will atone him. All he can do is keep flagellating himself and hope his betters one day forgive him.

  16. a project recently launched by the antiracist scholar Ibram X. Kendi

    I believe you misspelled “raving lunatic”.

    1. Based on his publications, Ibram X. Kendi is as racist as you can get.

      1. That’s what “anti-racist” means.
        It’s a euphemism

      2. I gave Kendi’s “How to be an Anti-Racist” a shot, doing my best to neutralize my own opinion that ancestor worship/guilt is detrimental shite. He’s intelligent, educated and growth-minded. I honestly relate to him in some ways (not saying I’m educated), but I think he’s a prime example of how inextricable expertise is from bias. He’s got a PhD in Black History, which is to say he’s very educated and very biased. He interprets the 3/5ths compromise as white people judging the human value of blacks, rather than as a political move by the North to limit the power of the very people actively engaged in slavery. How embarrassingly naive and/or self-serving.

        He also makes it clear that anyone with a B.S. degree in social sciences probably thinks the Scientific Method is a diet to aid conception, or goes something like “Form hypothesis, twist reality to fit hypothesis, ignore critical peer review, write a book, get paid.” I honestly think he’d be a great thinker if he’d gone into an actual science. Anyone interested in history should be cautious around him. Read James Oakes, Shelby Steele or… maybe anyone else.

  17. Corporations are doing this themselves, cancelling everyone that should express wrongthink.

    Like just now we have a baseball announcer fired (or soon to be) over a Blazing Saddles reference.

    1. It wouldn’t be “Where all the white women at?”, would it? Like the Ring of Power, this joke should not be used willie nillie.

  18. America’s original sin is using violence against peaceful people.

    You’re not going to fix that with more violence.

    1. What the hell you talking about? Do you not know the history of how all countries evolved?

      1. He meant disproportional violence. The natives raping, killing, and enslaving each other before white people came to the new world was “peaceful” violence. Just like all the “peaceful” protests in Portland.

    2. There are no peaceful people. Everyone has violence in their nature. It’s civilization’s job to make violence maladaptive.

  19. Rich white liberals waging a proxy war on the proles, by way of race hustlers abusing legitimate black grievance.

  20. After reading this I think I’ll watch some of Don Rickles on YouTube.

    1. +1 hockey puck

  21. Then the definition of the word nigger will be unconstitutional.

    The definition of the word is racist.

    It’s the most horrible word when spoken by whites and the most friendly when spoken by blacks.

    Good luck with that.

    1. Will you just fuck off, Misek.

      I swear, you’ve got to be some sort of Soros-funded astroturfer, playing the role of hick bigot to try and discredit the rest of us here.

      1. You don’t need any help with that.

        1. Yeah, no. Compared to you El Chapo seemed balanced. Now piss off you delusional piece of shit.

          1. How’s that working for you dipshit?

    2. Does your head hurt when you try to think?

      1. Maybe you don’t understand anything I say, or you disagree and are incapable of refuting it, or you’re just another troll.

        In any case, the problem is yours.

        1. “Maybe you don’t understand anything I say, or you disagree and are incapable of refuting it, or you’re just another troll.”

          Maybe we understand everything you post, Nazi scum.

          1. That’s good dipshit.

    3. Not so kindly fuck off.

  22. sounds like another law designed to put black people in jail.

    1. And if applied equally, this is exactly what will happen.

      I publicly called a black guy a nigger exactly once when he was bullying me and a few others after band practice. It happened. I’m not proud, but it is what it is.

      I called a Hispanic guy a spic exactly once. When I was 10 or so, after the black guy (several years older than me) who lived across the street told me to say it to the Puerto Rican kids who just moved in next door. Didn’t realize then that it meant I was probably going to take an ass whooping, which I did.

      Now just how many times do you think a white kid growing up in Miami was called a “cracker” or a “gringo”?

      Every. Fucking. Day.

      Yet somehow I don’t imagine that Kendi will want the law applied in that direction.

      1. I’ve been referenced as n****r, by black people (and once a white guy who I’m pretty sure was a Hall County, GA Blood, judging by his company) more times than I’ve ever spoken the word. It wasn’t in anger – just playing basketball and used the same way as someone would say “that guy/dude”.
        I find the word pretty much impossible to say.

        1. I’m out for a walk last evening on a major street. I hear some rap music coming out of a boombox with flashing lights carried by a young black dude. I couldn’t make out all the words, but the loudest and most clear lyrics went something like this:

          “Fuck nigga fuck bad shit
          nigga fuck fuck bad shit nigga nigga fuck!
          Fuck nigga fuck nigga fuck bad shit
          Nigga nigga fuck nigga fuck fuck bad shit nigga nigga fuck fuck nigga nigga fuck.”

          Imagine the above put to a beat with a bass drum, and some strangely OK guitar accompaniment. Then you get the picture…err… sound.

      2. Now just how many times do you think a white kid growing up in Miami was called a “cracker” or a “gringo”?

        s/Miami/Hawaii/
        s/gringo/haole/

        Yeah. I don’t think Kendi is going to support punishing that. Of course, he’s undoubtedly using the “special” definition of racism that says it’s something only white people can do.

  23. It’s great for twitter because they profit off controversy and more importantly – censorship. It gives them tremendous power. So smart move, Jack.

    However the best thing for rich people to do is to fund resort colonies so people can retire and leave jobs for others to work and support themselves and thereby obviate both big government and charity. Enjoy a well-deserved rest after 5 billion years and let the robots take over the heavy lifting and plant a trillion trees to offset global warming. In return the residents live by strict rules of conduct and vote for small government, low tax libertarians.

    The socialists will inevitably get the wealth of the rich. The question is whether it will be voluntary (“Christian communism” as described by Paul) or forced through taxes and looting.

  24. The Constitution of the USA is already anti-racist, by virtue of the Bill of Rights and the 15th Amendment.

    No government agency (or private company or university receiving federal funds) should be allowed to ask for the race of an individual on any government form, and any forms including “race” should be shredded and redesigned immediately.

    1. It’s not anti-racist, it’s non-racist. Anti-racist means fuck white people.

  25. “To fix the original sin of racism . . .

    I reject the concept of original sin–even within the context of Christianity.

    We accept responsibility for the murder of Jesus of Nazareth of our own individual will–no one inflicts that guilt on us over our objections. When God charges us with the murder of Jesus of Nazareth, we plead guilty of our own free will. Those who choose to remain outside of God’s grace are judged on the basis of their own individuals choices–not on the basis of Adam’s sins or anyone else’s.

    Original sin assumes there is morality without choice, and there can be no morality without choice. A comet smashing into the earth and killing a billion people isn’t behaving immorally (or sinfully) because comets are incapable of choosing to do otherwise. In order for there to be morality (or sin), it must be possible for us to choose to act differently.

    Slavery is a comet that landed before I was even born. I never chose slavery. My choosing to behave differently has no impact on the past. I did nothing to bring it about. Those are the sinful choices of others.

    We’re responsible for how we choose to treat each other–not for how others chose to treat each other in the past. And if immorality is a function of violating the right of others to make choices for themselves (see theft, rape, and murder as examples of immorality and sins), then holding other people responsible for choices they never made is itself immoral. It’s a sin.

    1. Puritans gonna Puritan

    2. I reject the concept of original sin–even within the context of Christianity.

      You reject original sin or collective guilt/compulsory atonement?

      Because the two are not the same thing. Half of original sin is the fall from grace. Not to bolster Kendi’s position, but you can reject responsibility for the comet while still acknowledging that the comet fell from the heavens.

  26. Yet people wonder why some were uncomfortable with Jo Jorgensen’s tweet that “it’s necessary to be anti-racist”.

    1. Sure, because ‘anti-racism’ necessarily means ‘siding with everything that every other antiracist person also believes’.

      You know, it is possible to be an anti-racist and also believe that Dr. Kendi is a lunatic with some crazy ideas.

      1. Anti-racism necessarily means that one must be preoccupied with what everyone else thinks or says.

        Fuck that. I mind my own mouth, you mind yours. What anyone else thinks is not my concern.

        1. Anti-racism necessarily means that one must be preoccupied with what everyone else thinks or says.

          Sure it could be, if your name is Karen.

        2. What anyone else thinks is not my concern.

          Well, yes and no.

          Obviously we don’t want thought police going around punishing wrongthink.

          On the other hand, there are some extremely odious ideas out there. What is the best way to express one’s disapproval of those ideas? To take a hands-off approach, and simply say “I don’t give a shit if you’re a literal Nazi”, is to implicitly elevate evil ideas to the same level as non-evil ideas. Sorry but they’re not all equal.
          It’s not wrong IMO for individuals to express their disapproval of evil ideas within their own circle of friends/acquaintances.

          1. Or by ignoring them, we deny them the attention they want. Gee, what a concept. There are very few actual Nazis and they know they aren’t liked. They don’t need me to tell them that. Ignoring them denies them a platform.

          2. Ignore them till they present themselves, then laugh in their faces.

            Like we did when Klan members showed up on Jerry Springer.

          3. Anti-racism is necessarily racist. You’re prioritizing “race” above all else, and that perspective dictates how people and situations are to be interacted with and assessed.
            Judgement by color of skin rather than content of character.
            Anti-racism denies individuality by treating people as units of a class whose being is subsidiary to, and determined by, that class.

            1. “Anti-racism is necessarily racist”

              Now you are literally quoting Kendi. He spells out clearly in “How to Be an Anti-Racist” that racism (against whites) is necessary to undo racism (against anyone else). Mmkay. And now he wants to enshrine that in a non-elected, permanently funded bureaucracy of race-dependent thought-policing under the double-speak moniker of “Department of Anti-Racism”. How amazingly Orwellian.

              It’s been said that the KKK couldn’t have devised a better plan to keep blacks down than Affirmative Action. Now that people are claiming the Boogaloo’s (or whoever) are trying to start a race war, I’d say they couldn’t have recruited a better ally than Ibram Kendi.

      2. Define what anti-racist is. And she said it wasn’t enough to passively not racist but we must be actively anti-racist. Whatever the fuck anti-racist means.

        1. Well I would define “anti-racist” as more than just being not racist in one’s personal life, but applying appropriate social pressure within one’s circle of friends/acquaintances to disapprove of racist actions taken therein. It doesn’t have to be government mandates (that is what people like Dr. Kendi wants), it can just be people voluntarily deciding that racism, even casual forms of it, won’t be tolerated in their presence. Sure one could be a total Karen about it and demand that it be stamped out everywhere, but one could also be more measured and parsimonious in the use of that social pressure and only apply it judiciously for the most egregious examples of it. That is how racism will end. When it is accepted by enough people that it’s just not a tolerable belief, kinda like Nazism is now.

          1. And now define what racism is and why I need to be actively anti-racist? You made a Karen joke above but it seems an awful lot like your definition of anti-racist is for everyone to be a Karen.

          2. Where is Nazism accepted or tolerated? Fucking straw man there.

            1. Well, there’s Misek…

              1. Who accepts him?

          3. Racism will only “end” when people stop prioritizing race.

            I absolutely condemn your racism, jeff.

        2. My guess is she had in mind calling out racists within the Libertarian Party, and among libertarians.

          1. But whose definition of racism should we use? Because to a number of people anything to the right of BLM and Antifa is racist.

            1. Generally, I don’t think you would find that attitude at, say, a Libertarian Party convention.

            2. Ask Kendi. It’s all spelled out in “How to be Anti-Racist”, including his belief that racism against white people (his wording, specifying Affirmative Action, at least, but now thought-policing, apparently) is REQUIRED to ammend for past racism. For those of us who absolutely value social diversity AND cohesion, this ideology is disturbingly cancerous. As in, costing real lives and quality of life for all.

              1. It’s making racism cool again. Amazing.

      3. Oh, lord.

        “Anti-racist” in a political context is not some innocent generic term for opposition to racism, it’s a specific political movement with specific ideological content and policy goals. Just like “antifa” is not an innocent generic term for opposition to fascism, or “progressive” is not an innocent generic term for favoring progress.

        It is, in fact, not “possible to be an anti-racist and also believe that Dr. Kendi is a lunatic with some crazy ideas.” And while people who don’t pay any attention to policy and politics might make that mistake, you certainly don’t qualify.

        You’re being as deliberately disingenuous as a troll who declares that opposition to the GOP means that you’re in favor of monarchy, because “republican” means “opponent of monarchy”.

        1. No, “anti-racism” means “opposition to racism”. The rest is just you trying to stuff a certain viewpoint down other people’s throats.

          FFS stop being afraid of publicly standing opposed to racism. It is ridiculous. There is nothing wrong at all with stating that you’re an anti-racist who disagrees with Dr. Kendi. Anti-racists are not monolithic hiveminds you know. Guilt by association is wrong no matter which direction it flows.

          1. What is active opposition to racism? And who defines what is racist?

            1. What is active opposition to racism?

              In actuality, that would be individualism.

              And who defines what is racist?

              I do. Anti-individualism enables racism.

              BruceD – a 91Bravo before it was changed to 68Whiskey.

          2. FFS stop being afraid of publicly standing opposed to racism.

            I mean, this is a group that thinks feminists are bad, so it’s not like this reluctance to be opposed to bigotry and inequality is anything new.

            On a tangential note, have you noticed how “feminazi” isn’t really thrown around much anymore? It was a super common insult up until about four years ago. I wonder why, rather abruptly, conservatives no longer wanted to associate feminists with Nazis.

            1. ENB, is that you?

            2. I believe feminist is now a fairly dirty word on its own. No hyperbole needed.

          3. No, “anti-racism” means “opposition to racism”.

            Uh-huh.

            So, let’s look at the list of “Anti-racist organizations and institutions” in North America on Wikipedia’s “anti-racism” page:

            Anti-Racism and Hate
            By Any Means Necessary
            Anti-Racist Action
            One People’s Project
            Roots of Resistance
            Southern Poverty Law Center
            Red and Anarchist Skinheads
            Redneck Revolt
            Skinheads Against Racial Prejudice
            Friends Stand United
            Catalyst Project
            Showing Up for Racial Justice
            The People’s Institute for Survival and Beyond
            Black Lives Matter

            So, this list of groups starts with one I can’t find any information on, then goes to “a militant, American far-left group”; a group of violent counterprotesters “cited as a precursor to the American movement later known as Antifa”; “the most mainstream and well-known anti-fascist or antifa organization in the United States”; an “anti-capitalist” group of ” various left-wing political tendencies, from anarchism to Marxism”; the famous SLPC; a group of self-described “reds and anarchists”; a “far-left political group” that’s “anti-capitalist”; one politically-unaffiliated group; a group “classified by the Federal Bureau of Investigation as a street gang”; a group “committed to anti-racist work with mostly white sections of left/radical social movements”; a group that’s against “white supremacy” “economic injustice” and “patriarchy”; whatever The People’s Institute for Survival and Beyond is; and the famous Black Lives Matter.

            The fact that the SLPC is the only thing even resembling a mainstream civil rights organization on the list, while oodles of Marxist and anarchist and other varieties of socialist are, makes it pretty clear that “anti-racism” does not mean “opposition to racism”.

            But, don’t worry, I’m sure you and your comrades will invent a new euphemism for “anti-capitalist thug” soon enough. How about “pro-ice-cream”?

          4. Is antifa simply opposition to fascism?
            Is alt-right, simply conservatives who don’t fit into the typical republican mold?
            Is pro-life a group of anti-gun, anti-death penalty pacifists?

            As DRM said, you’re either glaringly ignorant or deliberately disingenuous.

      4. Sure, because ‘anti-racism’ necessarily means ‘siding with everything that every other antiracist person also believes’.

        In my experience the vast majority of people who claim to be anti-racist DO think it necessarily means siding with them on everything and believing everything they believe

      5. You know, it is possible to be an anti-racist and also believe that Dr. Kendi is a lunatic with some crazy ideas.

        It’s not possible to be anti-racist. The opposite of racism isn’t anti-racism, it’s non-racism.

      6. Since “anti-racist” is a made up term, made up by people like Kendi… yeah, actually, I’m pretty sure it has a specific meaning.

        Just don’t be racist. Which isn’t good enough for the “anti-racists”.

        1. ^ this ^
          Seriously. Read him in his own words, people. He literally belives racism (his word) against whites (AA & now the DOA) is anti-racist. He’s got a tad more brain-fodder than that, but he literally says that. Personally, I won’t go anywhere near anyone who tells me “You’re either with us or against us!”, “Silence is Violence!”, etc. THAT anti-free-speech, jingoistic gibberish is the path to intellectual rigormortis. Says I.

  27. Yeah, this Department of Antiracism idea is patently nuts.

    Racism won’t end with more coercion and more government mandates.

    Racism will only end when people themselves accept an ethos of anti-racism.

    1. So racism will end when everyone embraces engaging in racism? You’re like a person that thinks if you just apply one more layer of black paint a fence will magically turn white.

      1. Racism will end when there is enough voluntary social pressure for racism to be “not cool”. That won’t happen with government mandates. That will happen when people genuinely internalize an ethos of making racism not cool. Get it now?

        1. I hate to break it to you but anti-racism is racism. It is the ethos of being actively racist towards groups certain people believe deserve it because of what people who vaguely looked like them did in the past. Go play Mott and Bailey somewhere else.

          1. Umm, “anti-racism” means “opposition to racism”. What is wrong with you?

            1. Play Mott & Bailey with someone else. Anti-racism involves embracing racism against acceptable targets. You don’t get to redefine the term when it gets inconvenient to defend.

              1. SOME people who call themselves “anti-racists” are actually racists. Okay, fine. But then again SOME people who call themselves “anti-racists” are not. Why are you willing to let the kooks and assholes define the term for everyone? Are you afraid of labeling yourself as an “anti-racist” because you don’t want to be associated with kooks like Dr. Kendi? Then just say so. Be yourself. Don’t let the assholes speak for you. Don’t be hesitant in your opposition to racism because there are some people who are also opposed to racism that you don’t like. That is just a silly position to take. Are you going to say “I’m not going to call myself a libertarian because there are a lot of kooks and nuts who call themselves libertarians”? Or are you going to say “I’m a libertarian who believes what I believe in and I will let others speak for themselves”?

                1. So, next time a black person calls me a cracker or tells a white people joke I should call them out?

                  1. Sure, you should.

                    Does that actually happen to you a lot? Or is this a hypothetical? The other day you mentioned that you live way of in, like, the northeast corner of Montana. Are there a lot of black people going around that neck of the country calling white people cracker?

                    1. No, but I grew up on a reservation and live right next to one. And so I do hear it far more often than you would think, maybe not black people, but it still happens. As for black comedians, listen to just about any of them and ask yourself if a white comedian could get away with those jokes.

                    2. Just my opinion, but if you aren’t a racist and some native American calls you “cracker” or something that implies that you are a racist, then you have the right to speak up in your own defense.

                      I don’t know if it would gain anything out of the effort, or be listened to; that’s a different question than whether you have the right. In some some words exchanged on the street, it’s probably not going to get you anywhere.

                      As for the whole special rule where people that are part of a group can make jokes that are offensive if made by an outsider, I have never figured out exactly what I think of that. Bill Burr gets away with saying things about black people that other white comedians might not, but his wife is black so maybe he gets a pass when he mentions that.

                      These are definitely more uptight times for comedy and comedians than, say, the 80s.

                    3. White knight just changed the subject from “should condemn racist speech when encountered”, which was the context established by Jeff that soldiermedic was responding to, to “have the right to defend yourself” – and it seems pretty obvious that that goalpost was moved because of the position of the “races” in that case.

                      Anti-racism is racism because standards are set according to the racial class of each participant.

                    4. Nardz, I was responding to soldiermedic76’s question about whether he should call out someone who calls him a cracker, not to Jeff.

                    5. soldiermedic76
                      August.20.2020 at 10:43 pm
                      So, next time a black person calls me a cracker or tells a white people joke I should call them out?

                      The White Knight
                      August.20.2020 at 10:48 pm
                      Sure, you should.

                    6. The conversation is there for everybody to see, white knight.
                      You’re either being intentionally dishonest, by now trying to change or remove the context, or you don’t comprehend the conversation.
                      Take your pick

            2. “”Umm, “anti-racism” means “opposition to racism”””

              People of color is a term used that includes all races but one. It’s sole purpose is to separate white people from everyone else. Us vs Them according to race is a way to keep racism alive for people who think white people are the source of their problems.

          2. I think you are thinking of reverse discrimination.

            1. Which is racism isn’t it? And what is actually being pushed by those who most often use the term anti-racist.

              1. Yes, I agree, it is a form of racism.

                It is pushed by some people who use the term anti-racism to mean things like reverse discrimination and whatever Kendi is proposing. Not sure how we determine that is is “most” people who use the term vs. “some”. I imagine you don’t literally mean “most”, but just mean that you have strong feelings of opposition to government-imposed anti-racism.

                Jeff is also correct when he says that is not the dictionary meaning of anti-racist. And that one can be anti-racist in a voluntary, social influencing way. And that being against racism in that way is not a bad thing.

                1. No, anti-racist ideology is a fairly new term and is being pushed for the most part by a certain political mindset. How about we just treat everyone like human beings and shun the assholes? I don’t need to call them out, that gives them the attention they want. Shunning is far more effective punishment.

                2. And yes I do mean most, because about the only people I’ve ever heard use the term before Jorgenson did were progressives who were using it in exactly the manner I described. A quick Google search showed the top ten returns on the term anti-racist all are links to progressive ideology that is mostly blaming whites and states that racism is normalized by white people )who by implication are all or mostly all racist).

          3. You’re right about that.

        2. Dramatis personae:
          Bill, a white supremacist
          Jeff, Bill’s anti-racist friend

          Setting:
          A cafe where Bill and Jeff meet for lunch

          Bill: Jeff, have I ever told you how great it is to be a white supremacist? My views on race are so universally accepted that I commonly use racial slurs and everyone approves.

          Jeff: That’s not what’s cool, Bill. *This* is cool. [Slides copy of How to Be an Anti-racist across table]

          Bill: [Picks up book, reads for a few moments] Holy shit, all my ideas about race are wrong! And I thought they were cool the whole time!

    2. Racism will only end when people themselves accept an ethos of anti-racism.

      No it won’t. This is like saying competitive sports will only end when people themselves adopt an anti-Lakers or an anti-Patriots ethos. To act like achieving equality for all races forever will be achieved once the black race is equal to the white race is, itself, racist.

      Anyone anywhere protesting a genocide is necessarily a racist. Whether they’re shouting “Hands up! Don’t shoot!” or “The Jews will not replace us!” they’re segregating groups of people by race and ascribing disparate races higher and lower social status.

  28. Racial or other inequity? Ethnic? Religious? How about height or weight? As an American of Italian background and Catholic it is high time we apply these equal representation principals to Ivy League Schools, the Media, Hollywood (especially script writers), investment banks…hmmmmmI think I like this idea.

    Jack Dorsey is a moron..he really is an example of “bighead” from Silicon Valley. He is a clear and present danger to liberty. The $10M will be blown on inflated salaries, BMW’s, woke parties and living large as they used to say in the 80’s….maybe Jack can pay someone to humiliate him…

    1. I was thinking that as well.

      You can bet big that the party celebrating this grant will cost $25K easy. This money will be gone within a year.

      1. No kidding. Zuckerberg dropped 100 million on Newark schools, how did that work out?

  29. Seems to me that from what we know about DNA the idea of race is an anachronism that in a sane world would be relegated to the dust bins of history. It has also been my observation that “racism” practiced by individuals and government in the US at least is at an all time low and that a tiny minority seek to keep the charade going for personal benefit. Meanwhile most people are getting on with our lives and don’t give a shit. If I go to a family gathering whether my own, my wife’s or my son’s in-laws I will see white blonds and redheads, black men and women, swarthy Arabs, Hispanics of all kinds, Jews, and Asians. And a bunch of kids who are every conceivable variation of the above. I suspect most families look something like that these days. It’s easy to hate a “race” in the abstract but it’s pretty tough to hate your own grand kids.

    1. Hence the upping the ante in rhetoric.

      It’s no longer effective to call one a racist, so now the rhetoric has shifted to WHITE NATIONALISM!!

      Forget that there are probably less than 50k actual white nationalists in America today. That doesn’t matter. Now ALL OF SOCIETY IS BASED ON RACISM.

      They are desperate. If they weren’t, the truth would suffice.

    2. Unless you Norwegian, even one drop, because we always claim Norwegian because Norwegians are fucking perfect (except for a brief period in the 1940s we don’t really talk about except to mention how awesome our underground was, much better than the second rate Marquis).

    3. Race as a biological concept is baloney.
      But race as a sociological concept, sadly, is not baloney.

      1. Welcome to Nazism (National Socialism) USA where gov-powers try Socialist policy entirely against the U.S. Constitution. Why must history keep repeating itself.

      2. Race as a biological concept isn’t baloney, it’s just not what most people imagine that they are.

        There’s the Southern African Hunter Gatherers who split off from the rest of us 200,000 years ago and have the most genetic diversity of any other peoples. An example of which would be the Khoi-San.
        Then there’s the Central African Foragers, who split off 150,000 years ago. An example of which would be the Aka people.
        Then the last two groups split apart 80,000 years ago.
        The first is the West Africans who include the Bantu and the Nilotics.
        The second are the Eurasians who include everyone else. For instance the Cree, Ethiopians, French, Papuans, Amazonians, Arabs, Japanese, Russians, Berbers, Vietnamese and Sudanese. Even though Eurasians have huge phenotypic differences from each other, they are far less genetically diverse than the Southern African Hunter Gatherers.

        No race is pure of course. The West Africans received genetic input 15,000 years ago, in the neolithic from European Hunter Gatherers, leading to a presence of the Eurasian Y haplogroup R1b in some Bantu Groups. And archaic human groups like the Denisovans and Neanderthals intermixed with Eurasians, and two different unknown African archaic human groups mixed with the Central African Foragers and the West Africans.

        Anyone that says race is a construct however is making a political statement and not a scientific one.

        1. Correction: Mesolithic, not neolithic.

    4. I suspect most families look something like that these days. It’s easy to hate a “race” in the abstract but it’s pretty tough to hate your own grand kids.

      Thomas Jefferson hardest hit.

    5. We share 99% of our DNA with chimpanzees. We must be the same species.

    6. Meanwhile most people are getting on with our lives and don’t give a shit. If I go to a family gathering whether my own, my wife’s or my son’s in-laws I will see white blonds and redheads, black men and women, swarthy Arabs, Hispanics of all kinds, Jews, and Asians. And a bunch of kids who are every conceivable variation of the above. I suspect most families look something like that these days. It’s easy to hate a “race” in the abstract but it’s pretty tough to hate your own grand kids.

      Even then fervent mass (anti-)racism takes effort to generate and enforce. It’s not like every family reunion where everyone in attendance is blond-haired and blue-eyed they sit around scheming about how to hold down the negros and at the ones they do it’s equally tough to give up time with the Grandkids to fight off a vague menace that isn’t forcing its way, en masse (except when Jack Dorsey donates $10M to get an anti-racism amendment passed) into your reunion.

      1. No we are mostly playing pinochle and drinking beer.

    7. Yeah,

      Studying DNA through ancestry.com may inspire you to wear a kilt, make meatballs or chuck a spear but that’s about it.

      The dangerous part of race is culture and we choose that. Most racism is directed at cultural behaviour which conflicts with other cultural behaviour.

      That conflict doesn’t go away until conflicting behaviour does.

      10 million isn’t going to make me accept the culture of baby momma bastards, absent Fathers or violent gang culture.

  30. So cancel him already.

  31. I think the real issue here is WE ALL KNOW the only thing the DOA will be doing is making EVERYTHING racist by gun-forces ( Now doesn’t that sound exactly inline with Hitlers agenda??!!?? )

    But; Lets consider the positive side. The Federal government will FINALLY have to abolish

    1. The White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities.
    2. The White House Initiative on American Indian & Alaskan Native Education.
    3. White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for African Americans.
    4. White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for Hispanics
    5. White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for Asian

    …and why stop at race? Kill of the sexist government too —
    1. Office on Violence Against Women
    2. Council on Women & Girls
    3. State mandated Women hiring quotas
    4. State mandated Women’s children rights
    5. State mandated Women’s alimony

    Problem is everyone already knows ALL Anti-Racist branding in today’s world is a SURE symbol of Instituted Racism and Sexist policies and mandates across the board.

    There is no end-in-sight for those who have learned that they can get away with pointing gov-guns to get !!!-ENTITLED-!!!

    1. Pay close attention. The goal is equity. NOT equality.
      These acts organizations would increase in power and spending, constantly ratcheting aid up to various groups until their significant outcomes are equal to the white man (a practically ambivalent/impossible goal, depending on your level of analysis).

  32. “To fix the original sin of racism” Proof positive that we’re witnessing an irrational, illogical faith based religious movement. But then rationality and logic are just evil white based thinking and tools of oppression.

  33. Well.
    Today I learned that the term “anti-racism” is actually super-secret coded dog-whistle language for “pro-racism”. Who knew.

    1. Anyone who has studied the movement for the past couple of years.

      1. I think Jeff’s point is that anti-racism isn’t a bad thing. And if you let anti-racism be defined as the one specific flavor of progressive anti-racism you are opposed to, then you are giving up a good (opposition to racism) and conceding to letting progressives define what anti-racism is.

        1. Why do I need to be in opposition? Why can’t I just ignore the assholes and not acknowledge their existence? One of the first things you learn is that shunning is a very effective punishment. Much more than calling people out.

          1. Well, say, a hypothetical situation where you are sitting around the table with a bunch of friends, and one starts telling “nigger” jokes. The right thing to do is speak up and tell him it’s not cool to do that.

            1. But what if it’s funny?

              CB

              1. First they came for the rape jokes….

            2. Does this happen to you often? Maybe you need a new set of friends.

              It has been over 40 years since I have heard a racist joke at the expense of blacks, and that one did not use the term n****r.

              Perhaps you might spend your energy more profitably working against the progressive racist drug laws.

        2. I think Jeff’s point is that anti-racism isn’t a bad thing.

          Anti-racism as defined by Kendi is a bad thing: equality of outcome is unachievable, racist, and totalitarian.

          And if you let anti-racism be defined as the one specific flavor of progressive anti-racism you are opposed to, then you are giving up a good (opposition to racism) and conceding to letting progressives define what anti-racism is.

          Government should not get involved in race in any way. That is the only acceptable way for a free society to operate: total equality under the law regardless of sex or race.

      2. Meant to write “anti-racism per se isn’t a bad thing”.

        1. I think it’s an ambiguous term that is most often used to push a political agenda. Most people aren’t actively racist, and most people tend to not really care. But we are told this is not enough because the KKK still has around 5000 members or so. And there are still inequalities. But if I point out the war on poverty is the cause of these, well then I am a racist. And therefore you must be actively anti-racist.

          1. Well, you certainly have a right to be opposed to progressive anti-racist policy. But I’m not a progressive, and I’m pretty sure Jeff isn’t, either. And Jeff is correct in making the fairly mundane point that the dictionary meaning of anti-racism is just “opposing racism”.

            1. Jeff is far more progressive than you like to admit. He even states he identifies far more with the left and considers himself a left-libertarian who believes the left is better on just about any individual right than the right is.

              1. I haven’t seen any comments like that from him, but I’ll take your word for it. I’m OK with a left-leaning libertarian or right-leaning libertarian, as long as they are engaging in real discussion.

                Jeff has been rude to conservative-leaning libertarians and conservatives here lately, but I’ve been observing a long time and I know they were rude to him first, and frequently. They still pull rude shit like calling him fat and, I think, insinuating he is a child molester instead of actually engaging him in civil debate.

                1. wow you seem to have an intimate connection and clairvoyant-like understanding of Jeff.
                  no disrespect bro, it’s rare for a fella to have that other special kinda fella in his life, it’s cool you two found each other.

                  1. Thanks. There’s a certain bonding that has taken place among those who have been picked on by the Trump mean girls.

                    1. omg I’m straight up loling, I was definitely being facetious, though on a serious note, from the bottom of my heart, really am glad you have Chemjeff as your special buddy and that you two bonded over being called out for your constant sophistry. that’s a special bond that comes once, maybe twice in a man’s life.

                2. I’m OK with a left-leaning libertarian or right-leaning libertarian, as long as they are engaging in real discussion.

                  Jeff has never engaged in “real discussion”. He insults and spews platitudes.

            2. And Jeff is correct in making the fairly mundane point that the dictionary meaning of anti-racism is just “opposing racism”.

              Yes, and in the context of private, voluntary conduct, opposing racism is a good thing.

              Once you make opposing racism part of a political platform, it necessarily follows that government needs to classify people by race and treat them unequally under the law, and that is unacceptable. And that is the context we are talking about here.

        2. “Anti-Racism” wasn’t a thing until it was a thing.

          Nobody who opposed racism went around calling themselves “anti-racist” until Kendi and friends came around.

          It’s important to understand that the postmodernists are in the business of redefining to their advantage basically every single political word with strong connotations. (eg, “diversity”, “equity”, “racism”, “sexism”, “inclusion”)

          When you march along with “anti-racism” you are carrying water for ideas you probably don’t adhere to.

          Try reading “Anti-Racist Baby”. It’s all about teaching your toddlers to see race and racism instead of individuals. That being colorblind is bad. And that they should “Confess when being racist” and “welcome all groups voicing their unique views” (god forbid individuals should have unique views of their own, that would be “inauthentic”.)

          https://newdiscourses.com/translations-from-the-wokish/

    2. I think some of the commented who are arguing with you have a point about how progressives pursue anti-racism. But they are so emotional and so fixated on their opposition to progressivism that they are missing your point and rushing to peg you as a progressive.

    3. Which is a shame because you are making a completely prosaic point that shouldn’t be controversial at all: being against racism is a good thing in general.

      1. Again, define what is racism and how do you propose we oppose it?

        1. This probably a poor definition, but I’m winging it: racism is a belief that a person’s character, intelligence, and other qualities can be known not by getting to know or assessing that person as an individual, but simply by knowing which collective grouping they have been assigned to based on superficial physical characteristics such as their skin pigmentation, whether the person’s eyes have an epicanthal fold, etc.

          Specifically, racism against African people was built up philosophically in the American South to help prop up a system of slave labor. (Mike Munger has done some great work documenting how racist thinking and white superiority was deliberately built up to overcome Southerner’s initial Christian guilt about engaging in slavery: https://www.econtalk.org/munger-on-slavery-and-racism/)

          1. And that is what most people oppose.

        2. Opposing racism:

          – First of all, just pointing out that the whole concept of humanity being divided up into caucasian, mongoloid, and negroid racism is some shitty pseudo-science dating back to, like, the 18th century.
          – Like Jeff was talking about above, by opposing racism in your personal life and speaking out when someone is being racist.
          – There might be room for some laws, but you have to be careful that it doesn’t all a pretense for abusive, overreaching government. Many commenters here are totally correct that progressive anti-racist ideas fit that bill.

          1. Calling it out how? Should I get in their face? Or just call them a racist? Why can’t I just shun them?

            1. Sure, shunning is fine. I didn’t think of it above, but nothing wrong with it.

              There are situations where shunning is possible, be there are situations where your life is a bit too entangled with someone else to simply walk away and shun them.

          2. First of all, just pointing out that the whole concept of humanity being divided up into caucasian, mongoloid, and negroid racism is some shitty pseudo-science dating back to, like, the 18th century.

            Yes, and it is exactly that “shitty pseudo-science” that “anti-racists” are using when they divide Americans up into different races and infer the existence of “racism” based on unequal outcomes correlated with that “shitty pseudo-science”.

            Libertarians are neither “racist” nor “anti-racist”, we are about treating people equally under the law and otherwise engaging in voluntary interactions.

          3. There might be room for some [anti-racist] laws, but you have to be careful that it doesn’t all a pretense for abusive, overreaching government.

            In order to have anti-racist laws, the government needs to use “shitty pseudo-science” to divide people up into different races, and then it needs to treat them differently under the law. What is that possibly going to accomplish? How is that possibly going to result in a less racist society?

      2. Do a Google or Duck Duck Go or Bing search on anti-racism and then tell us we are overreacting to the term.

        1. Did what you suggested. Comes up with a mix of links that support both things you have been saying here, and things that Jeff has been saying.

          1. Second hit on Google:
            https://nmaahc.si.edu/learn/talking-about-race/topics/being-antiracist
            The first was a list of anti-racist materials, all written by progressives, and guess who was number one on the list?

          2. And I just did the same search and didn’t find a mix. Funny.

          3. You seem like a smart, good guy, and I’m trying to have a real conversation with you. But honestly it’s like you are now trying to browbeat me into perceiving the world your way.

            1. No, he’s pointing out that you are (as usual) lying

            2. No,pointing out that the term anti-racist has certain connotations in today’s lexicons and is most commonly used by people pushing a certain political agenda. As for ChemJeff, he has attacked me unprovoked because I dated disagree with him. On multiple occasions. He loves to use the implied insult and than claim he wasn’t insulting you. And then he complains when others insult him. He has done this to me multiple times over the years. So forgive me if I don’t give him the benefit of the doubt anymore.

            3. But honestly it’s like you are now trying to browbeat me into perceiving the world your way.

              Changing how people look at the world is what discussions are about. You perceive the world as being divided into “racists”, “anti-racists”, and possibly “bystanders”. But that division itself presumes an interpretation of other people’s actions based on what you yourself call “shitty pseudo-science”.

              The libertarian position is that there should be equality under the law, period. And a decent libertarian (and decent human being) will generally respect and refrain from judging other people’s choices in their voluntary interactions, and not project their own beliefs about race onto other people’s interactions.

        2. https://www.businessinsider.com/what-is-anti-racism-how-to-be-anti-racist-2020-6?op=1
          First hit on Duck Duck Go on anti-racism. It says it’s a white only problem and if you are non-racist white you are actually a racist and that all (or most) of today’s problems are created by whites. It then goes on to say we have to dismantle all the system to root out racism and whites will have to sacrifice to offset inequalities.

      3. Which is a shame because you are making a completely prosaic point that shouldn’t be controversial at all: being against racism is a good thing in general.

        Being against racism in your personal conduct and speech is a good thing.

        Using your official capacity as a politician or government employee to promote or impose anti-racist policies on people is wrong and authoritarian.

    4. Today I learned that the term “anti-racism” is actually super-secret coded dog-whistle language for “pro-racism”.

      It’s not a dog whistle, it’s in plain sight: Kendi is proposing applying different laws based on your officially determined race. That’s racism. It’s what slave states did and it’s what Hitler did.

    5. Are you pro-life?
      How could you be anti-life?

      Those words don’t exist in a vacuum. They go with a certain worldview and policy implications.

  34. US Dollar Rain Earns upto $550 to $750 per day by google fantastic job oppertunity provide for our community pepoles who,s already using facebook to earn money 85000$ every month and more through facebook and google new project to create money at home withen few hours.Everybody can get this job now and start earning online by just open this link and then go through instructions to get started……….HERE? Read More

  35. Boston University’s Center for Antiracist Research, a project recently launched by the antiracist scholar Ibram X. Kendi.

    FTFY

    1. How is it “research” if they have already reached their conclusions and have a fully formed plan for advocating political coercion to achieve their predetermined objectives?

  36. Americans should pass an anti-racist amendment to the U.S. Constitution that enshrines two guiding anti-racist principals: Racial inequity is evidence of racist policy and the different racial groups are equals.

    Companies like Google and Twitter will have to fire Asians by the thousands and hire African Americans and whites instead! They can hire those people from the NBA, NFL, and various TV and music businesses, where African Americans are overrepresented and need to get fired!

    Extending this to women: more women need to be forced to work in sanitation, garbage removal, and logging! And we need to make sure that women die, on average, as young as men!

    This is what Kendi is advocating.

  37. Ok, here’s a challenge for Jeff and white knight:

    Is anti-racism, as you choose to perceive and promote it, compatible with ignoring or not acknowledging race?
    For example, if I am out with 2 of my friends – Aaron is black, Brett is white – and encounter someone who says to one of them “nice shoes, boy”: should I respond differently depending on whether he says it to Aaron or Brett?
    Should I be actively “anti-racist” if he says it to Aaron? If so, what should I do if he says it to Brett?
    Should I be actively “anti-racist” if it’s a white guy but not if it’s a black guy?

    In what way is “anti-racism” opposed to racism if it is a perspective dependent upon, and interpreting the world through, race?

    1. I agree: that’s the core of White Knight’s problem: by considering “anti-racism” to be a rational and moral position, he already accepts the validity of what he himself calls “the shitty pseudo-science” of race. That is, he interprets other people’s interactions through the lens of racial categories that have no validity in the first place.

  38. So far this year we learned math is racist, science is racist, history is racist, planning ahead is racist, saving money is racist, delayed gratification is racist. You wanna live in that world?
    Maybe Jack is trying to impress the black chicks, he’d be better off laying the money directly on them or maybe he’s really into Ibram the Tenth Kendi.

    1. “…math is racist, science is racist, history is racist, planning ahead is racist, saving money is racist, delayed gratification is racist…”

      Don’t forget free speech. And, of course, law enforcement.

  39. As long as there are racial differences, even statistical ones people who identify and discriminate them will be called The increasingly vague term, racist.

    The hypocrite hurling the insult simply discriminates differently and chooses to escalate the conflict.

    I hope 10 million buys a clear definition of who is constitutionally allowed to discriminate and who isn’t.

  40. Every month start earning more cash from $20,000 to $24,000 by working very simple j0b 0nline from home. I have earned last month $23159 from this by just doing this 0nline w0rk for maximum 3 to 4 hrs a day using my laptop. This home j0b is just awesome and regular earning from this are much times better than other regular 9 to 5 desk j0b. Now every person on this earth can get this j0b and start making dollars 0nline just by follow instructions on the given web page……Follow the link.

  41. So Dorsey is for criminalizing thoughts he thinks are bad?

    How utterly unsurprising.

    1. He wants Twitter to be the law.

  42. Questions for Kendi:

    1. Are black people capable of racism?

    2. How would the government address systemic racism?

    Yeah, I really don’t need to hear the answers to know they would be cringe worthy.

    1. 1. No
      2. Reparation$

      There are your answers.

  43. If you watched Dorsey in Rogan what you saw was an ignorant, illiberal, mid-wit punk.

    That he’d give money to this clown and his pseudo-intellectual gibberish is of no surprise to me.

    Next up. Robin Di Angelo for Dorsey.

    1. If you watched Dorsey in Rogan what you saw was an ignorant, illiberal, mid-wit punk.

      Looking back on it, I’m pretty sure someone will have to kill Jack Dorsey (not suggesting someone do it). Tim Pool didn’t just destroy him, he destroyed his lawyer, and, not to put the guy down but, it’s not like Tim is some sort of cult-of-personality legal ju-jitsu master.

      To see a high paid professional defend your stance first hand and get so utterly destroyed by a practiced amateur and then to double-down to the tune of $10M? Yeah, you’re a danger to yourself and others.

  44. I knew that shortly after the riots/protests started and before the trickle of guilty white leftist/cowardly corporate $$ started flooding into BLM, NAACP, etc., that BLM was going to make the corporate shakedowns that made people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton quite wealthy look like amateur hour. I wonder how much of this $10M is actually going into the cause vs. Kendi’s (& his pals’) pocket?

  45. I have been working from home for 4 years now and I love it. I don’t have a boss standing over my shoulder and I make my own hours. The tips below are very informative and anyone currently working from home or planning to in the future could use these.Make 5000 bucks every month… Start doing online computer-based work through our website…check my site
    .

  46. “Racial inequity is evidence of racist policy and the different racial groups are equals.”

    Into the trash it goes. Now I know never to take this Xendi guy seriously. Is Thomas Sowell racist for arguing that inequity is not the result of racist policy?

  47. In the 1960’s blacks advocated for ‘equal opportunity.’ Having achieved that by the late 70’s, they immediately changed the demand to ‘equality of condition.’ It’s a subtle but important distinction.
    I don’t know of any government that could create equality of condition to its citizens. Human initiative always wins out.

    1. ^This; but actually it was 1868 at the federal level.

  48. “To fix the original sin of racism, Americans should pass an anti-racist amendment to the U.S. Constitution that enshrines two guiding anti-racist principals: Racial inequity is evidence of racist policy and the different racial groups are equals. The amendment would make unconstitutional racial inequity over a certain threshold, as well as racist ideas by public officials (with “racist ideas” and “public official” clearly defined). It would establish and permanently fund the Department of Anti-racism (DOA) comprised of formally trained experts on racism and no political appointees. The DOA would be responsible for preclearing all local, state and federal public policies to ensure they won’t yield racial inequity, monitor those policies, investigate private racist policies when racial inequity surfaces, and monitor public officials for expressions of racist ideas. The DOA would be empowered with disciplinary tools to wield over and against policymakers and public officials who do not voluntarily change their racist policy and ideas.”

    Tell this cretin to go fuck himself.

    Dorsey is a retard but this guy a dangerous pseudo-intellectual moron.

  49. Libertarians may not want to hear this, but this is one of the unintended outcomes of letting the ultra-rich keep all their money: One of the largest donations to a fascist cause in American history.
    Also check out “Here’s a list of Corporations funding the “Defund the Police” Movement at Dailycaller.com. Misleading title but interesting read.

    1. “all their money” wouldn’t be a problem if we had a functional government that strictly adhered to and enforced by the judiciary branch the U.S. Constitution that wouldn’t allow socialist policy.

    2. Libertarians may not want to hear this, but this is one of the unintended outcomes of letting the ultra-rich keep all their money: One of the largest donations to a fascist cause in American history.

      There is nothing wrong with the ultra-rich keeping all their money.

      Our problems are two-fold: some ultra-rich became ultra-rich through government policies (and that includes much of Silicon Valley), and the government has too much power and is being bought by the ultra-rich.

  50. Would it be wrong to start a free shuttle service transporting rioters to the neighborhoods of the rich folks bankrolling them?

  51. Ibram X. Kendi. That’s a real American name if I’ve ever heard one! Ship his nigger ass back to Africa. I’m black by the way. A real nigger.

  52. Ibram X. Kendi. That’s a real American name if I’ve ever heard one!

  53. Maybe we could just ratify an amendment banning all wrong think

  54. You got to love one of America’s most successful capitalists donating so much money to a person who believes capitalism is racist.

  55. Intentions. We intended that college education for most people would advance the goal of an enlightened and pluralistic society. Exactly the opposite occurred.

  56. Studying DNA through ancestry.com may inspire you to wear a kilt, make meatballs or chuck a spear but that’s about it.

    The dangerous part of race is culture and we choose that. Most racism is directed at cultural behaviour which conflicts with other cultural behaviour.

    That conflict doesn’t go away until conflicting behaviour does.

    10 million isn’t going to make me accept the culture of baby momma bastards, absent Fathers or violent gang culture.

    If laws won’t do it, I’ll discriminate against wrong behaviour in other ways.

    1. White privilege?

      Privilege is what I get for choosing civilization.

  57. Racism is like pornography, you know it when you see it, but it is hard to define, and defined infinitely different by different people.

  58. Hate speech laws just increase police power, the point of those protesters and all should be take blacks of jail for smoking pot, not put (non violent) racists in jail.

    1. (I mean, if saying f*gg*t was illegal, a lot of rappers would be in jail.)

      1. Do you stutter?

  59. Maybe we could just ratify an amendment banning all wrong think.You got to love one of America’s most successful capitalists donating so much money to a person who believes capitalism is racist.
    use this free tool for your twitter account
    visit : fancy text generator

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.