Culture War

Educators, Please Stop Teaching the Characteristics of 'White Supremacy Culture'

Everybody's least favorite chart made another appearance, this time in a Washington University in St. Louis training session.

|

Earlier this week, Washington University in St. Louis held an online workshop titled, "Is Professionalism a Racist Construct?"

The event attracted plenty of criticism from conservative media. Fox News made fun of its online description, which is filled with social justice jargon: "So-called professionalism is coded language, a construct that upholds institutional racist policies and excluding practices." But the presenters seemed to welcome the controversy; Cynthia Williams, assistant dean of community partnerships at the university, bragged that she was getting into "good trouble."

The entire presentation is available online, and it's just as cringeworthy as its conservative critics expected. Notably, the presenters cite the antiracist educator Tema Okun's "White Supremacy Culture" a body of dubious work that makes all sorts of unfounded and frankly racist assumptions. Indeed, the presentation includes a slide, "15 Characteristics of White Supremacy Culture"—though the slide only mentions five—that claims possessing a sense of urgency, preferring quantity over quality, wanting things to be written down, perfectionism, and becoming defensive are aspects of white supremacy.

Defensiveness and perfectionism, when taken to excess, can contribute to unpleasant work, school, and social environments. But there is nothing that connects them to whiteness. A boss who sends too many memos may annoy his employees; it doesn't mean he is a white supremacist, or is propping up whiteness as a construct.

In fact, there's a danger in ascribing to "white culture" qualities that are, in many cases, positive. Similar work by Judith Katz, another antiracism expert, lists timeliness, planning for the future, self-reliance, being polite, and respect for authority as "aspects and assumptions of white culture." Timeliness and politeness are good things that have nothing to do with whiteness. Moreover, it would be wrong—and, again, racist—to teach kids of color that if they work hard and plan for their futures, they are betraying their heritage.

These claims by Okun and Katz are straightforwardly ridiculous, but their work shows up all over the place. This document, attributed to Katz, previously appeared on the website for the National Museum of African American History and Culture.

Liberal writers such as Jonathan Chait and Matthew Yglesias have condemned the work and urged educators to stop using it, but it still shows up everywhere. And while the work by Okun and Katz isn't exactly the same thing as critical race theory, it's true that there's some overlap in terms of how these concepts are presented in antiracism workshops by so-called experts.

To the extent that the backlash against critical race theory is partly a backlash against assistant deans of diversity asserting that writing things down on notepads is racist, it should be easy to understand why it is happening. Educators should really stop using this framework when they discuss racism.

NEXT: Should a Christian Group Be Allowed To Fly a Flag Outside Boston City Hall?

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. Parents, please stop sending your children to government schools.

    1. +

      1. Democrats have fully embraced black supremacy and their efforts to destroy the current culture. And this is because these people hate white people. That's it. That's all. They are bigots, prejudiced against whites. It's that simple.

        1. It's not even Black supremacy though, because it's infantizing and patronizing to Blacks and denies their personal agency.
          Furthermore it's being primarily pushed by rich, privileged upper class Whites who are paying Judas goats like X. Kendi and Al Sharpton to put a black face on it.

          This is actually class warfare against the working class by the aristocracy, and they are using phony racial attacks to do it.

          1. Pretty much that.

          2. Yeah, these people might have a lower view of black folks than the KKK.

          3. Welcome to the new plantation. And just like on the old plantations, the privileged white owners are getting serviced by some of their black pets.

            1. "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

              1. interesting read:

                https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/movies/new-movies/controversial-reality-of-the-villages-the-suburb-some-claim-is-paradise/news-story/64e2d787ae5a4d6e52d93c7f6c20be30

                I missed what the complaint was beyond putting chemicals on the yards.

                Childish hatred and jealousy, perhaps.

                Oh! Theyre SUCCESSFUL in keeping trash out.

                IC!

        2. John Derbyshire calls this the Cold Civil War, waged by "liberal" goodwhites against conservative badwhites.

      2. Earn income while simply working online. work from home whenever you want. just for maximum 5 hours a day you can make more than $600 per day online. (re9) From this i made $18000 last month in my spare time.

        Check info here:- ==>> Visit Here

    2. Unfortunately, Washington University in St. Louis is a private university.

      1. I don’t read the articles. And the student loans are government loans.

      2. You misspelled "racist university".

      3. Washington University in St. Louis is a private university.

        Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits racial discrimination in education and makes any institution engaging in it ineligible for federal funds. This includes student loans, virtually all of which are now issued by the federal government, in addition to grants which are a huge budget component of even private universities.

      4. Just because it's private doesn't mean we can't criticize it, it just means from a libertarian perspective that the government shouldn't interfere with how it is ran. That is the biggest misunderstanding of libertarianism and classic liberalism, I'm more a classical liberal than a libertarian, however, we don't believe that there should be no criticism of private institutions. Instead we believe criticism is far more effective then government interference to change undesirable outcomes.

        1. Unfortunately, Reason had taken the last five years of "muh private institution" to dismiss any bad behavior, especially by tech companies.

    3. Washington University is a private school.

      1. Which schools' tuitions are not primarily funded by government backed student loans? The government subsidy is the reason that crappy schools continue to churn out useless degrees.

        1. But, they're accredited.

    4. No more sister soljah moment from sane democrates and libs I guess. Math is racists, reading is racist, everything is racist..there I've explained why we don't have equity or better yet more than our fair share based on sunk costs. Irish or Italian..yes your 20% of the population each but because of sunk costs you only get 2% of the pie now...

      Ha ha ha

  2. "To the extent that the backlash against critical race theory is partly a backlash against assistant deans of diversity asserting that writing things down on notepads is racist, it should be easy to understand why it is happening. Educators should really stop using this framework when they discuss racism."

    I think that a significant part of the problem is that so many schools have an administrative position titled 'assistant dean of diversity'. The name implies that there is also at least a dean, and probably an entire department of staffers. Do they teach any classes in this department, or is it purely administrative? Which would be worse?

    1. I think that means Assistant Dean whose scope of work is "diversity". Unfortunately with such a nebulous concept defining one's job, one can go down some increasingly insane paths.

    2. The "diversity" scam is a huge windfall for leftists in colleges.

      https://dailycaller.com/2019/07/29/college-diversity-offices-zero-negative-impact/

      93 people are employed by Michigan’s Office of Diversity, Equity & Inclusion, receiving a combined $10.6 million in annual salaries, according to AEI scholar and Professor of Economics and Finance at the University of Michigan Mark Perry.

      Columbia University has dedicated $185 million to diversity funds since 2005 and American University plans to spend $61 million on diversity in 2019 alone.

      1. And not a single dollar of it can be shown to affect positive change.

        1. just imagine how much worse things would be if they WEREN'T throwing all that money at it! /s

          1. Many people have difficulty imagining zero.

      2. 93 people are employed by Michigan’s Office of Diversity, Equity & Inclusion, receiving a combined $10.6 million in annual salaries, according to AEI scholar and Professor of Economics and Finance at the University of Michigan Mark Perry.

        Who knew that keeping black people on the plantation pays pretty well?

        1. And lordy, here I thought I was just shiftless and lazy.

          1. I can't believe they don't all know that we have a bondag... I mean student-loan debt problem.

          2. That's "shiffless", you insensitive clod!

            Or is that the "insistence on 'getting it right'" part of White Supremacy?

        2. Ironically diversity departments aren't very diverse.

      3. The "diversity" scam is a huge windfall for leftists in colleges.

        Of course. If Grievance Studies majors can't find jobs the schools eventually people will stop taking the classes. Then the schools can't hire as many left wing activists as they want to. So places must be found. This is why they are now pressuring private businesses to adopt the same model. These people can't do anything else and the schools have bloated their own budgets as much as they can.

      4. And the students brought in by the programs are taught to make success through these very values identified as White Privilege values. . . .
        Unless they have these professors, who teach it's (dare I say "moral"?) better to sit back and wait for "Whitey" to give you what he will, from the government.

      5. Leftists, and expecially BLACK leftists.

        Wonder if the other "oppressed minorities" have noticed they only get the scraps yet? Pretty sure the Asians (incl. Indian) have, but then, many of them come from families who have used the precepts of White Supremacy to enrich themselves, contributing to the prosperity of the racist system as a whole in the process. I think we're supposed to "REEEEEE!" about here...

    3. "assistant dean of diversity'" It sounds a lot like having a "Safety Supervisor" in a safe shop. The person in both positions has to justify the existence of their position. They have to find things to do, to correct, to show that there is a need for them.

      1. There's a relevant quote from Archer, to Pam, I think, about having a job that can be done by a bulletin board. Sums up the DEI grifters, and a goodly chunk of education, perfectly.

      2. So basically, Anita Sarkeesian?

    4. The growth of bureaucracy and administration at all levels of education is the primary reason we spend more per kid than anyone else with continuing declining outcomes. Half of all graduates from colleges of education are now education administration majors. That's right, slightly more than half of all teacher's college graduates aren't even fucking teachers. When people talk about how good Scandinavian schools are, and how much their teachers get paid, I tell them they have far less administration and far fewer bureaucrats, so they can pay their teachers more. When people talk about German universities, I tell them (among a bunch of other facts, such as only 10% of students can attend University) that they don't have the administration, deans, bureaucracy of American universities. When you look at charter schools and private schools, that spend less per student with better outcomes, you see they have far less administration.
      A big reason for this growth in administration is because of our decades long push that everyone has to get a four year degree. There isn't the jobs for these graduates, especially liberal arts graduates, so they had to make work for them. And this is what we get. The truth is that we have an oversupply of bachelor holders, far exceeding demand. In a normal market this would result in decreased value for bachelor degree holders (which we have seen to some extent). But instead we have seen a growth, often in government, of make shift work.
      I value education, and am proud of my master's degree, but I also know that education is not simply obtaining a sheep skin, and doesn't require that. I look at the data, and see that we are sorely lacking in the US many technical and vocational trades, that are actually vital to a manufacturing economy. The push for everyone to get a bachelor's degree actually has resulted in hindering a return of manufacturing to the US. Welders, electricians, plumbers, truck drivers, machinists, heavy equipment operators etc are needed to keep a manufacturing economy running. We are short in all of these fields. Instead of pushing for University education and measuring school success by how many attend University after high school graduation (many of who won't ever graduate university) we need to be encouraging trade schools and apprenticeship programs. The ROI is also far better for a good portion of the students.
      Sorry for the rant.

      1. Interesting thoughts, and I wouldn't mind your opinion here.

        Some European/UK degree programs are only 3 years. Bachelor's , a minor Bachelor's, etc. I have a Belgian friend whose first degree was 3 years (She's a PhD now, obviously with significant time and work before her advanced degree). I don't know anyone who looks down on European degrees as less than what you'd get from a State school here, but maybe I'm wrong.

        It seems the more we load degree programs up with classes like ethnic studies, which seemed (when I was in college) only to be there to allay irrational fears that college graduates are all xenophobic white men with tweed jackets, fraternity pins, and mid Atlantic accents who have never met a Mexican or Black Person, the greater the expense. Both in paying for the classes and books and in opportunity cost from another year or more in school. Yet these might really have limited value to, say, an engineer. At least from a professional qualification standpoint, where an employer will really want someone who knows math and physics and the specifics of their trade, or someone who knows code and computer science.

        Is this valid in your opinion? Could there be a professional "minor" bachelor's degree with a lighter non-core classload that feeds the information economy at a lower cost?

        I base this idea on the notion that University education may once have been a liberal arts program that gives you a broad cultural knowledge and ability to evaluate information -- it helped people learn how to learn -- but now no longer has the exclusivity it once had. It's now used as a qualification even for pretty mundane employment, yet hasn't been restructured as a trade school pertinent to modern employment.

        Whatever your opinion here, you're right about one thing. Every level of administration added for ridiculous reasons is another expense. Evidence of this is in how the price of a college education has risen at roughly 3x inflation since the 70s. Literally my whole life, with no abatement, which in any other business would mean a crapload of competitors springing up, or people with better ideas in the market with disruptive solutions at lower cost.

        And High School trade programs being cut was a mistake -- maybe woodshop was a joke when I was in school, but making programs like shop NOT a joke would be great for many kids. Getting non-academically inclined people, who intend to go into a trade, out of the academic-focused classrooms is far better for people genuinely on a University path, too. Teens are remarkably susceptible to peer pressure, good or bad, and focused, high-performing classrooms actually make it easier for those who want to excel as it is just the norm.

        There's no reason a diligent, trade-oriented high school kid can't get an HVAC education, or be certified as a welder or a deisel mechanic in short order after a couple of years of proper trade-focused education in high school. It would be the best use of their time and my tax dollars, and make young adults so inclined ready to work at a level well above working the grill at the McDonalds.

        1. Mainly, in my opinion, the need for bachelor's degrees for even mundane jobs is what I term credentialism. What first opened my eyes to this phenomenon was when I was a nurse. I worked as an LPN in several hospitals but saw the standard of care for LPN's getting more restrictive every year. This was being driven by nursing associations, who were made up of primarily advanced degree RNs. It really was brought home to me, who had extensive training in wound care, was on the wound care team, and had extensive wound care experience, I was told that this was now beyond my scope of practice, and had to be performed by an RN, and then they expected me to train the RNs how to do it and chart it. The reasoning was that RNs could better evaluate the wounds, however, I had to train them how to evaluate the wounds. I told the associate degree RNs that once they pushed out LPNs they would go after associate degree nurses next. The biggest difference between associate degree RN and BSN is that BSNs receive more "leadership" classes, but actual practical knowledge is barely different. And now we see associate degree RNs, often with decades of experience, being pushed out of hospitals in favor of new graduate BSNs. This despite a severe nursing shortage.
          We see it especially in the white collar fields. An associate degree or technical training should be enough for a good portion of white collar, administrative and technical fields. And I do believe this is because of the "everyone" needs a four year degree mentality that is especially prevalant on the left and with Baby Boomers, who were the first generation that were pushed to go to college. This is when we first starting also seeing the first calls for a "well-rounded education" and the growth in degree requirements. Then the growth in government funded student loans and now the majority of degrees in the US require 5 years not 4. You look at countries in Europe, and outside of England (which is much more like our university system) the have far fewer required classes and almost all of them are directly related to your major and non-degree related electives are almost unheard of. This is what those calling for "free University" don't understand. In Europe those "free universities" are bare bones, only degree related classes, extremely hard to get into, have no SUB, dorms, extra curricula activities, professors only teach, don't have office hours and don't do counseling, and have little administrative overhead. Asian schools are similar. US, Canadian, and English Universities are far different than the Germanic and Scandinavian Universities. Those countries also stress technical training and apprenticeships. They realize the importance of these fields for a manufacturing base.
          The change in Anglosphere countries has occurred with the transition from a manufacturing based economy to a consumer market based economy, however, as we are seeing with the supply chain shortage, a consumer market based economy, without a strong manufacturing base, a consumer based economy is susceptible to disruption. We really need both.
          One final note, Chinese universities really are, for the most part, paper mills. We had a Chinese PhD working in our lab when I was in grad school, who supposedly had all this experience, publications, etc, but couldn't even perform the simplest of tasks, i.e. didn't even know how to use a pipette. Our major professor and the head of our department swore they would never take another student from China. They also weren't exactly happy with the skills and education of the Taiwanese master's student we had in our lab. The rest of us had to constantly put aside our research to "assist" them with their research projects. At least the Taiwanese student did improve dramatically with training and went on to get a PhD, but the level of knowledge was similar to our undergraduate assistants initially.

          1. 100 BILLION ++++

            Preach it.
            .The newer abd worse scam, along the lines of advanced degrees, is the ARNP scam.

            They deceive patients by calling themselves Doctors.

            They have medical- liberal arts doctorates.

            This is a profit move.

            A real Doc told me they are under trained and order too many tests.

            Duh, they arent MD' s !

          2. And yet, the main area of study is STILL allowed to be partying!

          3. Re: crappy Chinese universities -- it's the same with their pilot training, and not just in China. Part 121 schools here in the US have figured out how to ride that particular CCP-funded gravy train, and they churn out hundreds of commercial and ATP pilots every year for the Asian carriers whom I would not trust to drive an ice cream truck.

          4. "Mainly, in my opinion, the need for bachelor's degrees for even mundane jobs is what I term credentialism. "

            Yes and as you note, this was largely caused by a need to find work for people with otherwise worthless degrees.

            I have seen this with the whole evolution of STEM into STEAM. About a decade ago, parents with science and engineering degrees began getting nervous that their kids were not getting decent education in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics. The problem was that the vast majority of teachers are no longer taught any STEM classes. Up through middle school, even Mathematics teachers often don't have math degrees.

            And so, STEM became STEAM- but adding "Arts" to STEM, all of a sudden schools could qualify for STEM grants because they could call "make a computer out of clay" STEAM. I have had to become very careful of STEM summer programs for my kids, because some are literally You Tube video design, or building shit in minecraft (not programming- building shit).

        2. Another story that opened my eyes to credentialism was a story from the early 2000s in the Coeur d'Alene Press. A local mill had wanted to be part of career day, needed millwright apprentices. The kids would be paid while learning a lucrative career. The high school counselor told them no, because the schools job was to get the kids into college, according to the counselor. Anything less was seen as a failure. The counselor also said if it was up to him, he wouldn't allow the recruiters in from the services either, but federal law required it. He felt every student that went into the service was a failure on the schools part, even if they did it to get training and or money for school.

        3. The only real issue for those 3-year degree holders is that a lot of graduate programs don't accept them as equivalent to 4-year degrees (even in Europe). Otherwise, yeah, I don't think anyone cares.

          Hell, we are one of the only countries in the world that makes you do a BA/BS and then an MD or JD. In most countries physicians and lawyers only have a bachelor's degree or equivalent. The title doctor is reserved for degrees that require publication of original work (even though it some fields most of that is drivel).

        4. How the heck are you supposed to indoctrinate the next generation of mid-level bureaucrats and managers with that kind of thinking?

          1. That is a profound statement, we no longer teach kids how to think, instead we teach kids what to think. We no longer challenge them, we spoon feed them. And then we wonder why they are all miserable.

            1. The qualifications gap has only been growing...

        5. What you want is simple, and it's called trade schools.

          Targeted programs stripped of frills designed to output a qualified professional in the shortest amount of time.

          Teacher uniona hate 'em.

        6. Are you disrespecting my C+ in Wood Shop, which included making the world's worst baseball bat? I was only a few decades ahead of the art world environment wherein I could claim it was a work of capital-A Art

      2. Degrees aren't for education, they're for compliance.
        That's why the push for everyone to get 4 year degrees, and the creation of worthless jobs to give them. The degree proves you're willing to accept all the bullshit they throw at you and go through the prescribed motions without straying or causing trouble.

        1. It is noteworthy that for all their faults, Google has been beating this drum for quite awhile. They spent years tracking the performance of kids coming into their company from high end and low end schools, and found no real correlation between pedigree and success for the company.

          That is why they have created their own curriculums for Project Management, User Experience Design and Data Analytics. These 3 - 6 month programs will earn you a certificate that they will accept in lieu of a 4 year degree.

      3. When we’ve surpassed Germany is bureaucracy, you know America’s in trouble.

  3. Everyone who voted or still votes for expanded government meddling is responsible for this crap.

    I'm really tired of lefties and progressives and meddlers in general tsk tsking that these results are not what they want. Too bad for us, but this is what government does -- expand. Once the low hanging plausible fruit (meat packing standards, railway safety) has been plucked, they look for the higher stuff like controlling money and meddling on employment contracts; then taking union sides shows where the votes and money are, and it's off to the races.

    Fuck everyone that expects government to solve their peculiar problems at everyone else's expense. Just fuck right off.

    1. I just wanted some potholes filled. Instead I got bike lanes and a speed cameras.

    2. "this is what government does"

      'Tis the nature of the Beast. The founders knew it. Modern day State Worshippers refuse to believe it.

  4. Oh no, now Soave wants to stifle free speech and academic freedom.

    1. And promote white supremacy!

      1. Tobesure.

        1. #MakeNoMistake

          1. "Trump, of course, did the same, or worse..."

    2. He’s literally advocating for censorship!

    3. More right wing cancel culture run amok.

    4. Educational gag order

      1. Now that all the copies of "Maus" have been burned, he's going after the CHARTS!!!

  5. The Smithsonian's chart does a good job of writing the prescription for success;
    Study hard and work hard; achieve to succeed.
    Get married, stay married. Keep the number of children modest.
    Teach your children well, and mind they stay out of trouble.
    Be competitive, and keep yours eyes on the prize.

    I have lots of 'white' colleagues, with all sorts of backgrounds, and skin tones. All led focused, structured, ordered lives with the aim of arriving to where they are, as highly educated and highly skilled professionals.

    If you want to be my lawn guy, then feel free to skip many of the steps of 'whiteness'.

    1. It also says following The Science is racist.

      1. No, science is racist. The Science™ is perfectly fine, because it has nothing to do with that racist regular science

        1. how do you get the super-script? It stopped working for me when I would do (tm)

          1. Or is it (TM)?

  6. Whomever NMAAHC is, they need a brain-replacement.
    "Plan for the future" is white supremacy?

    1. Best part is whoever made that chart must have been planning for the future. There’s also quite a bit of written word….

      1. The irony. And I'm sure they're absolutely positive there are no absolutes.

  7. NEA is asking Twitter to take down any organization or person who says CRT is being taught in schools, and Twitter seems to be complying.

    https://www.nationalreview.com/news/twitter-continues-to-target-heterodox-education-publication-suspending-more-employees-without-explanation/

    1. Twitter, like FB, is experiencing the first stages of death.

      1. Twitter stopped reporting monthly total users in 2018. If this is the first stages, it's an awful long march and, it seems, we may not even know until it's over.

        1. As long as their are lazy journolists and corporate CEO's demanding censorship twitter will be around.

      2. If Twitter and FB comply with their marching orders, they’ll be rewarded handsomely. There’ll be some requirement for everyone to use it, like we’ll have to go to Twitter.gov to get our latest Covid directives.

        Sort of like how in CA unemployment comes via your Bank of America bank account, which you can never close.

  8. But Reason.com commenter "chemjeff radical individualist" has repeatedly explained that, in fact, educators should be teaching about race through a CRT framework. The real problem in American education is racist parents who show up at meetings and object to this material.

    #RadicalIndividualistsForRacialCollectivism

    1. But you see, if they taught it through the "real" lens of CRT, not this distorted lens, it would all be cool.

      Just like if they only practiced "real" Communism, and not the distorted Russian version.

      1. And real white supremacy, not the fake-lensed one we see from history would've been a-OK I'm sure.

    2. But, according to the CRT chart referenced in the article individualism is a trait of whiteness. If ChemJeff is a radical individualist would that then make him a White supremacist? And as a white supremacist how could he then advocate for CRT? Seems like a death spiral into the collective for all.

      1. We can only hope.

      2. It's the Circle of Guilt.

    3. I like you better when you're in character.

  9. "A boss who sends too many memos may annoy his employees; it doesn't mean he is a white supremacist, or is propping up whiteness as a construct."

    Suggesting that written communications at work are racist is suggesting that accountability is a feature of whiteness, which is a racist assumption against all other races. Assignments and expectations are written down so that people can refer to them over and over again without depending on faulty memory. Assignments with expectations are written down so that when people are held accountable for how they performed, they can refer to the instructions they were given to show that they performed well. Instructions are written down to make accountability as unbiased as possible.

    1. Assignments and expectations are written down so that people can refer to them over and over again without depending on faulty memory.

      Referenced, and copied, endlessly. We're not sure if a Turing Machine could pass a Turing Test, but we're certain it would be racist if it did.

    2. Accountability is racist. Assignments are racist. Expectations are ESPECIALLY racist, unless they are low ones. Memory is racist. Instructions are racist.

      Literally everything in your paragraph is racist. To be anti-racist, you have to be (basically) a nihilist.

    3. You miss the best and most obvious one though, contracts. These people actually want to say that having or insisting on a written contract is white supremacist.

    4. Check out White Boy Shultz over here.

    5. Leads one to wonder who the original White Supremacists were that invented this nonsense called writing. Bastards, one and all!

    6. Your logic is:
      A) Racist
      B) Propping up White Supremacy
      C) Racist

      Choose wisely lol

  10. I have a hard time thinking of anything more disgustingly racist than that garbage (that exists in contemporary American society).
    This stuff is absolutely despicable and can only serve to further hold back black children and discourage them from participating in institutions and behaviors that lead to success.
    They really have it completely backwards. Those things listed as "whiteness" are not tools used to hold other races back. They are tools available to anyone of any background that happen to have been largely invented and successfully implemented by white people. It is such a bizarre and disgusting way of thinking about things.

    1. They are tools available to anyone of any background that happen to have been largely invented and successfully implemented by white people.

      Not even that, they're general notations and guidances about the features and behaviors identifiable in anyone and across any culture, endogenously, that generate greater success. Black women looking to find men for slave labor will find hardworking, competitive, happily married men to be more productive (and less threatening) than lazy, unmotivated, sexually-agitated men (and women) of any race.

    2. I think all we can do is shine a light on it. This has been my hobby horse for several years now. I'm happy people are waking up to it, but I'm feeling a sense of exhaustion over it.

      1. Yeah, I've been trying to get a good sense of it all for a few years too. It is amazing how many people still want to pretend that it's just something that some weird academics are into and nothing we should worry about.

        1. Especially, as I point out below, if an affluent white person were to say "All the black people in a given business unit should all live in a single-room dwelling without regard for parents, spouses, siblings, or children and all be paid the same wage without regard to whether they can read or write English or any other known language." they would absolutely flip out and be incredulous at anyone who looked at the list *they* wrote down and say "Check. Check. Check. And... Check. It looks like they're giving you exactly what you asked for."

    3. “Moreover, it would be wrong—and, again, racist— correct to teach kids of color that if they work hard and plan for their futures, they are betraying their heritage the Democrat Party’s plans for them

      Edited for clarity.

  11. Indeed, the presentation includes a slide, "15 Characteristics of White Supremacy Culture"—though the slide only mentions five

    Yeah, well, detail-orientation is racist, so . . . .

      1. 15 * 3/5 = 5

        1. Mean funny.

          Kudos for cleverness.

        2. Seriously savage.

        3. Ouch. The rewards of deadthreading, lol.

    1. They wrote it down on a slide? White supremacists! Smite them!

      Imagine having to sit through Jewell blabbing all that crap at the screen. Wait for the cultural gesticulations to know when she thinks it's really important. No thigh gap but massive tooth gap is what I'd be thinking.

      1. Hey, I wouldn't kick Jewell out of bed for eating crackers.

  12. Again, a bunch of White Elite Coastals finding ways to promote their stereotypes of the Black People they claim to represent. White Savior complex.

    "The darkies are lazy, therefore we must classify industriousness as racist".

    It's like they WANT People of Color to remain marginalized, so that they (the White Saviors) can save them.

    1. Wouldn't be so sure that this is written only or mainly by whites. Also check out the first pic, top-right corner. It's a screen shot of a zoom call or something similar. Enough blacks are happily swallowing and promoting this bullshit. No sympathy.

      1. A good grift is a good grift, no matter what color you are.

      2. It's certainly not being written by any "underprivileged" people of any description. I'm pretty sure most actual black people who aren't insane academics are just as bemused by this crap as anyone.

        1. At least we are not saying theyre all white anymore. Thats a good start. It still stands that the “underprivileged” supporters and followers deserve zero sympathy.

    2. It's consistent with what's happened regarding "gender". You start out with a generalization from observations that certain behaviors and attitudes are male and others are female, by predominance. From that you get to a stereotype that one sex "owns" those characteristics and deduce that they should exclude the opposite sex from those, and vice versa. Then the reformer comes along and says, no, you can be any way you want to be, regardless of your sex. And that people were wrong to think that way in regard to sex, it's really gender that matters, and gender is arbitrary and societal, not biologic. But then the super-reformer arrives and says, you can be what you want to be, including your sex. And the super-duper reformer says the stereotypers were really right all along, and that anyone who exhibits those characteristics (but not the physical-biologic ones) is really of that gender, and by "gender" they really mean sex.

      So, same process with race. "If you vote that way, you ain't black. And I'm saying `ain't' because we know that's how blacks talk." So they decide the bigots were right all along. It's not that it was unfair to label non-whites as having those characteristics. No, it was wrong to assume those characteristics weren't good things that non-whites should be proud of, or at least aspire to have.

      We're going to see this mishigoss with other stereotypes if we haven't already. We're seeing a reaction against fat shaming. People have decided pedophiles were right, children are sexy. What else?

      1. People seem to be really bad at understanding that observations about characteristics that are shared by a certain group on average do not imply that said characteristics can be ascribed automatically to any individual belonging to that group.

        1. It's like when the weather forecast says 60% chance of rain, and then it doesn't rain, and people say the weatherman got it wrong. Gamblers understand, at least if they're good gamblers.

  13. The courtesy of showing up on time and respecting other people's time is "wHiTe sUpRemaCy!"

  14. So the point of the chart is "hire white people." Is that it?

    1. Or hire black people but don't assign them anything important or timely.

      1. Nor expect them not to make trouble, to put anything in writing, or to plan ahead.

      2. Also, cover only their personal healthcare costs and pay them just enough to cover a room to share with other people.

  15. I love how progressive response to black people is to basically say, yeah, black people really are inferior and not as sophisticated as white people. So, what white people need to do is stop expecting black people to be able to be successful in a civilized society.

    The truckloads of racism that forms the bedrock of the progressive view of race and people of color is just astonishing.

    1. I had a friend who told me that. He thought affirmative action should be practiced forever because blacks are genetically inferior and needed the help in perpetuity.

      1. The last person to voice that opinion was Jeff Davis.

    2. To be sure, they also feel that way about non-wealthy, non-Ivy, flyover country white people.

  16. Leftists, stop teaching postmodern nazism.

    1. There's layers of WTF in that cartoon. Layers.

      1. Needs more labels?

      2. Yeah. I wonder what's supposed to have launched that truck. Also what word preceded "SOCIETY".

    2. Wow, I am not sure what to make of that. I think that guy is awesome?

      1. Uh, I’m not sure that the artist is being sarcastic, I think the mask flew the fuck off for that one.

        I’ll be delighted to be wrong.

        1. Look at more of his postings. It seems like pretty much everything he posts is sarcastic or ironic. I could be wrong. Hard to tell these days.

    3. We don’t give a flying truck about 1a! (It’s part of a crash course called Society & Democracy)

  17. This is literally a list of stereotypes. What is wrong with these people?

    If this is the route we are going to take to find diversity, I will counter that the section on 'Aesthetics' appears to have been written by a C-student soy-boy with a tiny penis. Steak is not bland and why else is intellect listed alongside money and power as if it is a negative?

    1. If they're steaks are bland, they aren't buying good steaks or cooking them well.

      1. Sarcasmic had some steak cooking tips a few months back

    2. We need to just assume that anytime someone mentions diversity or inclusion or equity, they are doing something bad.
      Jordan Peterson is right, DIE needs to die.

    3. "This is literally a list of stereotypes. What is wrong with these people?"

      They're leftists

  18. Talk about a "bad look."

  19. Who said it? "eradicate the slander that says a black youth with a book is acting white!"

    1. Me?

    2. John McWhorter?

      ("Losing the Race: Self-Sabotage in Black America", Harper, 2001)

  20. I can’t imagine the hellish nightmare of working in a large corporate office today.

    1. I'm really glad this stuff isn't being pushed in my company. I think it helps that it's a Japanese company. I'm pretty much ready to make a nuisance of myself if it does come up. I'm not going to bite my tongue in the face of divisive, racist bullshit.

  21. This document by exclusion says that minorities don't have any of the traits needed to succeed. A business must do all of these things to stay in business. No sense of urgency? You will miss deadlines and lose customers. Not writing things down? No contracts=no business. Writing it down even protects the employees. Not on time? etc. Even a handyman or painter needs to be more businesslike than this.

    1. Profits are racist.

    2. This assumes a profitable, successful company is the goal. It's not. Destruction of individual rights and private property is the goal. Taking other people's stuff and telling them what to do.

    3. Well, handymen anyway. Plumbers have us all in their shit-stained hands.

  22. I like how quickly we went from 'we're not teaching this stuff' to 'yes we're teaching it, and it's a good thing.'

    1. Me: This is a racist ideology
      Them: It's just teaching about slavery and stuff!
      Me: Ok... sure.

      1. The distinction is they teach a modern how-to in regards to slavery, rather than any retrospective analysis.

  23. I like how the 'nuclear family' still reigns prominent in these things. I'm about ready to check out of the world and leave it to the young people. I'll just hole up in my compound with a lot of guns and hopefully die quietly in my sleep.

    1. Then what's the point of the guns?

      1. If the "hopefully" part doesn't work out.

    2. Funny thing is before the left embraced Civil Rights and welfare, blacks had a higher rate of marriage then whites.

      1. That might be the most offensive of all of these things. Really? Black people don't traditionally have strong families as much or more than anyone else?
        I know some are cynically pushing this crap for political reasons. But there are true believers too. What the fuck do they think the world they are trying to create is going to be like?

        1. The 'Family Structure' section, especially in the context of the rest, lays it out pretty clearly; they want black families, maybe multiple ones, living all together in a single-room dwelling, all making the same amount of money regardless of their age, gender, or (lack of) skills.

          1. That goal could be most easily achieved in a jungle, and with primitive...hey, wait!

        2. What the fuck do they think the world they are trying to create is going to be like?

          Depends who you ask. But generally, people in Togas which all look the same, there are no salaries, no private property, everyone greets everyone as "comrade", there is no war, no poverty, but also no wealth or status. All needs are met, everyone lives in giant vertical buildings which have the lowest impact on the surrounding nature preservers (where no human is allowed).

          Just think a world run by Davos forum attendees.

          1. Sounds awful.
            That always amazes me. When you get to the roots of Marxism and related ideologies, the world they aim to create is never one that people can live in without being bored and miserable. If it were actually possible to create the society you describe I guarantee that on day one people would start fucking shit up just to make something interesting happen. People do not function well without some kind of struggle or need for improvement. The idea that if everyone's immediate needs are met then everything will be OK is a really bad one.

            1. One of the primary tenants of evolution, including societal evolution, is you can only evolve under stress. Evolution doesn't occur when all resources are plentiful, because then there is no need to evolve. It is only during stress that evolution is possible.

              1. And I think our minds evolved to function in stressful situations. We need some kind of conflict or at least challenge to make life meaningful. Even if the challenge is as basic as just to get along with your wife and not hate your children.
                These people read 1984 and Brave New World and think they are utopia.

                1. It is the without a doubt that as we have become more affluent, and less physical and mental challenges, we are dealing with much worse mental problems. Boredom, in itself is stress. Most Americans are suffering from more and more boredom in our lives, and spending more and more time trying to find ways to alleviate that boredom. Social media, television etc are used to alleviate boredom but requires almost no effort. This is why, despite our historically level affluence, we report being less happy and more depressed than previous generations. Humans need stress and challenges to thrive. We need exertion both physical and mental to be happy. The lesson of the classic movie Office Space was that the protagonist only found happiness when he gave up his low physical exerting and boring job for manual labor.

                  1. Basic human psychology: you have to earn a living.
                    We've come to equate that with receiving wages, but it's not. Earning wages/capital is how one acquires means to meet needs, but it doesn't necessarily satisfy the earning a living part- especially when you consider humans used to build their own dwellings, kill/grow their own food, acquire and defend their own territory and loved ones, even create their own entertainment through physical activity and/or imagination.
                    Civilization has come to dominate humanity, and that has cost us dearly.

                    1. You and your tribesmen kill an elephant with spears?
                      Boom, you've earned your existence.
                      You buy some beef from Faceless Corporate Grocer?
                      Meh

                    2. How about if I raised that steer from a calf?

                    3. What if I understand where that steak came from? And that I had to expend my labor to earn the money to acquire it? Can we teach that?

                2. I think we need to bring vo-ag back into middle and high school, need more hands on teaching, need to encourage students to join extra curricula activities that challenge them. Band, choir, speech, debate, sports. Teach them the importance of finding challenging activities that reward hard work, rather than normalizing boredom. Study after study show that the happiest kids are in rural areas, because farm kids have challenges in their lives. Raising a 4-H steer is a lot of work, but the kids are generally happy doing it. But a bored society is a society that is easy to control. Blue collar workers in survey after survey tend to be happier than white collar workers, and more engaged and more charitable.

                  1. The research for decades has shown unmistakably that rewarding all behavior and accomplishments, without any reward for exertion or merit doesn't make people happier. That not having expectations doesn't make people happier. But progressives continue to push this ideology.

                  2. This is more reasonable than my solution: going out into the wilderness to kill a large predator, like a bear, with a spear - then wearing that bitch's fur as a coat evermore.

                    1. I think we need to a more balanced economy, both manufacturing and consumer driven. I don't think a primarily consumer driven economy is sustainable over the long run. And I love hunting and fishing. They are challenging, rewarding and I find, rather it is working with my hands, or hunting and fishing, I have some of my most profound thoughts. Sitting in front of a computer, doing drudge work, watching television, my mind tends to go blank and my thought processes slow down. I encourage more people to learn to hunt and fish. It's true a bad day fishing is still better than a good day at the office.
                      My son's favorite teacher, his speech and drama teacher and coach, told me that she encourages the kids to find a job they have fun doing. I disagreed with her but couldn't at the time articulate my disagreement. But I realize what I meant to say and felt, find a job that challenges you every day, then you'll be happy. I use the example of hunting writers. I can imagine that they get the phone fall from their editors, and are like "what, you want me to go on another safari to Africa, oh jeez!". Because the challenge has gone out of it. Find something that challenges you, and you will be more self satisfied then doing a job because it is fun. Eventually the fun wears off, and it becomes just another drudge, if it doesn't challenge you every day.

                    2. Can I have my Enron-hide with Pfizerskin lining?

                3. And I think our minds evolved to function in stressful situations. We need some kind of conflict or at least challenge to make life meaningful.

                  Not just our minds, basic cognizance. If option A and option B produce the same outcome, they're degenerate and you can't make a decision even if you wanted to. Even if you make option A and B degenerate, a decision engine of any kind will disregard it and seek out situations where A =/= B or cease to exist. There is, definitively, no Turing-complete language which cannot effectively perform conditional statements/logic. Even fundamental logic gates differentiate A = A and !A =/= A. Otherwise, they're just conductors.

                  When the Lord created the world and people to live in it - an enterprise which, according to modern science, took a very long time – I could well imagine that He reasoned with Himself as follows: ’If I make everything predictable, these human beings, whom I have endowed with pretty good brains, will undoubtedly learn to predict everything, and they will thereupon have no motive to do anything at all, because they will recognize that the future is totally determined and cannot be influenced by any human action.

                  On the other hand, if I make everything unpredictable: they will gradually discover that there is no rational basis for any decision whatsoever and, as in the first case, they will thereupon have no motive to do anything at all.

                  Neither scheme would make sense. I must, therefore, create a mixture of the two. Let some things be predictable and let others be unpredictable, They will then, amongst many other things, have the very important task of finding out which is which. -- E. F. Schumacher

            2. Don't ever forget the utopian roots of Marxism. Marxism believed that it would create a world in which everyone had everything they needed, and no one would be forced into a life of toil and misery. This is why "anti-work" has Marxist underpinnings. This is one of the central reasons so many Western Intellectuals always say that the Marxism that killed ~100,000,000 people wasn't "real" Marxism. Becuase it wasn't supposed to be that way.

              There are perfectly honest Marxists who believe in the utopian vision who don't WANT to kill people. It's just that when things don't go quite as planned because humans are pesky creatures which tend to individualize their wants and needs... you have to make some corrections to get people back on the right path.

              1. Oh, I never do. That's kind of my point. Even their idea of a perfect utopian society is awful and dreary. Even if it all worked out exactly as it is supposed to, it's a terrible, inhuman ideology.

              2. I never have wanted to be a millionaire, I was wouldn't mind being comfortable, but whenever I think what I'd do if I won a lottery, it is almost always invest it into my ranch and buy a few toys, like a couple boats and more guns.

                1. Wealth is a trap for the soul, spirit or however you want to articulate to grouping of chemically bound electric impulses that make us gradually better people.

                  The more you have, the more estranged from humanity you become, in many ways.

                  1. "Wealth is a trap for the soul,...The more you have, the more estranged from humanity you become, in many ways."

                    I think this is quite incorrect. Soldiermedic76's ranch *is* wealth. A rental property is wealth. Investments in a private business is wealth. Wealth is *impossible* without a direct connection to humanity, for without them to consume your output, you have no wealth.

                    My trip to Mexico with my kids bonds us and brings us closer. Does it bring us closer than if we went camping? Of course not, but it certainly isn't LESS effective. On the other hand, I just put down a good chunk of change on a new computer that I will use to isolate myself from my family, playing video games and rotting my brain. Wealth didn't isolate me- it is what I do with the wealth.

                2. thats white talk.

                  You should buy them on credit then default and blame someone else.

                  Didnt you learn ANYTHING from.CRT you Euro descendant?

              3. Marx also thought it was inevitable. The natural course of history, so to speak. He was wrong about that, too.

          2. Sounds like the hippy communes of the 60's. They never worked because there was always a small segment of the commune doing all of the work for the rest. When they got sick of working for the 'common good' they left. The commune then fell apart or the lazy ones found another commune to leach off of.

            Bernie Sanders. Commune leader who was eventually kicked out. Guess he found the next best thing, politics.

            1. He was never even a leader of the commune, just a bum who was canned from his carpentry job and wouldn't stop talking.

          3. "Just think a world run by Davos forum attendees."

            Your description leaves out the stately pleasure domes in the nicer, more scenic areas with temperate climes. Inhabited by the Davos Forum attendees. (they think)

        3. They also had a higher worker participation rate and were quickly closing the education gap and wealth gap. But whenever you point that out, their response is "so you like Jim Crow, huh?" No, fuck nut, all your programs you introduced after ending Jim Crow have made things worse. Equality under the law for everyone is a good thing, your parentalistic white saviors complex has only made things worse. Throwing endless money and low expectations doesn't help anyone.

          1. Racism is the only problem you're allowed to consider, apparently.

            1. And the irony is that those that push that narrative are the ones who are fine with the idea that minorities can't perform the same as whites. They say as much when they push shit like this. As I said above, if you take this into account, the only logical conclusion is if you hire minorities you can't expect any form of productivity out of them. It is literally the racism of low expectations. And that is exactly what the progressive movement is, racism of low expectations. Blacks can't score as well on standardized tests and have worse grades, solution eliminate tests, and grades. No, fix the schools and give them access to better schools through choice. Blacks have high single parenting, solution demonize the nuclear family as racist. No, realize that most of your social welfare programs reward single parenting rather than discouraging it, thus why the lowest economic brackets, regardless of skin color, have the highest percentage of single families. And it becomes self perpetuating. Single parents tend to have the least economic mobility and highest poverty, and the programs you enact promote single parenting (or at the least doesn't discourage it). None of the progressive ideologies discourages single parenting. Abortion on demand doesn't really discourage single parents, as most women find they can't undergo abortions once they do have an unwanted pregnancy and our welfare and child support laws result less hardship for being a single parent, thus less incentive to avoid it. As a result we've created generational welfare recipients. And it's a problem across all races, however, it is most pronounced in certain minority communities, as we've seen the destruction of the nuclear families in these communities and anyone who attempts to correct this problem is labeled a racist or race traitor.

              1. If you're ever passing through NM, talk to locals about tax and child policies; typically they are more informed than IRS agents about how to make the most of your money.

                Welfare: cradle to grave.

    3. Do you think that was meant to contrast with the extended family, or the non-family? I remember when "nuclear family" became a topic of discussion or controversy, it was contrasted with the "extended family", but then a few years later it was up against no family at all.

      1. The funny thing is, even in Europe and America the tradition has always been extended family, it was only after the second world war and the growth of suburbs and flight to urban areas that extended family became uncommon. In most rural areas kids still are part of an extended family. The grow up around the cousins, uncles, aunts and grandparents. This is much more a rural vs urban situation. The most conservative parts of the country actually still live predominantly as part of the extended family. And even those of us who don't have relatives near us, the community still knows our kids and looks out for them. We have personal relationships with our kids' teachers, we have fellow church members who look out for us, our businesses know our kids and know us. We celebrate as a community our kids achievements. And we are predominantly white community, with the largest minority being Amerindians who left the nearby reservation so their kids can be raised in this type of environment. For all the talk about the importance of extended families to Amerindians, I've rarely actually seen it on reservations (I grew up on one too). The amount of neglect and abuse on the reservations is kind boggling. Kids not sure where they are going to sleep one night to the next, or where the next meal is coming from. It isn't some form of benevolent tribal feeling, it is the fact that there is no foundation for these kids. And it isn't related to their culture, that yes most tribes historically did raise kids as a tribe, but today the truth is no one is raising these kids. No one is looking out for them. And they become prey to gangs, abusers, pedophiles (which is also a big problem on a lot of reservations). Ignoring the problem or making excuses for it won't make it any better, and that is what the progressives are trying to do, excuse it and ignore it.

        1. Appreciate your insights. Seems to me that one man and one woman create a child. For better or worse humans, like all animals, have a primal need to propagate the species. If nobody keeps the babies alive the proposition fails. As a practical matter the nuclear family is key to propagating the species. An extended family of cousins, aunts, uncles, grandparents and great grandparents makes sure all of the babies survive. And everybody has an incentive to make sure everybody else survives. The proposition succeeds.
          This shit is not complicated. It is the reason that human beings are the dominant species on the planet. It has succeeded for thousands of years. Government has distorted this winning formula by creating the welfare state that creates disincentives to be responsible for your own children. By creating social security that relieves us of the responsibility of taking care of our aging parents. We've seen the negative consequences of these policies since FDR but progressives continue to double down.

          1. The biggest problem I have with progressives is they never admit they were wrong. Like you said you just double down. Failure to admit your program didn't work, and actually was detrimental actually precludes the ability to progress. They label themselves progressive but we are really still debating the same stuff we were debating in the 1910-30s in a lot of cases. The only difference is that back then both parties had progressives, now it is only one.

            1. Just need more data. And better formulas. And Top Men. It'll work, you'll see.

              1. They will only THEN achieve their goal! Which, contrary to perception and claims, is actually NOT "families providing a stable, nurturing environment in which to raise children", but rather, the destruction of the nuclear family.

                To find what progressives *actually* want, ignore what goal they claim and see what will be destroyed in the process. That destruction is the real goal.

        2. " In most rural areas kids still are part of an extended family. The grow up around the cousins, uncles, aunts and grandparents."

          I'd also note that in Rural areas I lived where people were not doing well, you generally found them WITHOUT these basic family supports. Mom is living alone, not with the grandparents, because she got knocked up in highschool and her parents won't let her come home until she gets sober again.

          There are some pretty bad problems in rural America, and I have seen these problems up in rural idaho, as well as Colorado. They are almost always created or exacerbated by a family splitting apart and the lack of a support structure (such as church, fraternal order, or extended family) to help the family cope. From this comes drug or alcohol abuse, and then it spirals down from there.

      2. The nuclear family can probably be defined numerous ways. There's probably a more neutral definition that suggests the standard, Western (often American) typical suburban family unit of a Mother, Father and children (one or two) a detached single family home etc.

        Often other traditions can be grafted onto it, such as father as breadwinner, mother as home maker, generally consumerist. And then you can stretch from there, White, protestant, self-absorbed, individualistic, capitalistic and so on. Eventually you get into cis, "heteronormative", Christian, Republican, gun-owning and on and on. It's become a catch-all for an ideal that left-wing progressives loathe.

      3. The loss of extended family connections have been bad for all races. So I'd agree in that sense that the nuclear family as defined in the document is not in fact ideal. But I'm not sure that anyone is claiming that it is preferable to a more extended family structure.
        And I have no idea if that is what they are getting at. I sort of assumed that it was meant to counter people who point out that rampant single parenting is a root of many social problems.

        1. I read it the same way. Hillary wasn't exactly wrong in saying it takes a village, but was wrong in her conclusions as to what that meant.

          1. Hillary misrepresented her position. She MEANT "It takes a government to raise a child.", but didn't want to put it like that.
            Who knows why? At this point, what does it matter?

        2. And I have no idea if that is what they are getting at. I sort of assumed that it was meant to counter people who point out that rampant single parenting is a root of many social problems.

          Not likely, the social conservative gripe of single family parenting is a relatively recent phenomenon in the larger milieu of Marxism's long and hallowed tradition of hollowing out the family unit. As Peter Hitchens correctly noted about Marxism-- and he made clear-- all utopian philosophies, is you have to subvert family authority over their children to bring your utopia to success.

          It takes a village.

    4. just hope the Minneapolis cops dont show up at your door..

  24. > claims that pretty much all the "how to succeed" advice that actually works anywhere are aspects of white culture

    > claims to hate white supremacy

    ...um...

  25. "Quantity over quality, if it can't be measured, it has no value."

    Are they suggesting that quality cannot be measured?

    1. As someone who has spent significant time in quality assurance, I most definitely can measure quality.

      But, like all the other statements there, they are completely ignorant of how we work in the real world. Many of the most offensive things people say generally are ignorant, though, and this sort of "whiteness" stuff is remarkably offensive.

    2. Quality can be measured, but can't be easily scaled. Something can't easily be said to have more quality, only different quality or qualities. It can be said to have more or less of a particular quality, but not of "quality" per se.

      1. That makes no sense.

      2. I disagree.

        Re: power tools. There may be differences in the performance, or quality, of individual aspects, but an object is primarily taken as the sum of it's parts when it is bring wholly applied.

        My Bosch hammer drill is definitively of higher quality in all aspects to a Craftsman. It is majority more quality parts and feature than a Makita; though comparable in some aspects, the total 'score' is more desirable, making Bosch the superior tool of overall quality.

    3. Nah, it's just a smear of accumulation of capital.

  26. Imagine if someone was paid to create a parody of a CRT corporate presentation. Would they be able to top the main slide in this, with the woman yapping in the upper right corner?

    Literally unable to distinguish parody from the real thing, incredible.

  27. If the Left keeps defining “whiteness” as “every positive trait”, it’s going to make “white supremacy” a tautology.

  28. Timeliness and politeness are good things that have nothing to do with whiteness.

    "Mañana is good enough for me, motherfucker!"

  29. The religion ones are pretty choice too. Is there a more solidly Christian racial demographic than black Americans?

    1. Yeah, the ones that keep their slave names.

  30. There's a logical fallacy in that slide (and yes, I know, logic is considered a "white thing" too). The fallacy is that while it is possible that cultures of white supremacy have those characteristics (and I'm not willing to unilaterally agree with that), just because a particular organization has those characteristics doesn't mean that it must therefore be a "white supremacy culture." Yet, this seems to be exactly what these folks are using this presentation to say.

  31. Reading, writing and arithmetic are now racist. If you can preform any of those feats you might be a racist. Please check with your local school teacher to be deprogrammed.
    An educated person is dangerous!

    1. 2+2 = REPRESSION!

      "Help help Im being repressed!"

  32. the work by Okun and Katz isn't exactly the same thing as critical race theory,

    Right, it's the results of applying CRT. Further if it wasn't the intended result of CRT then the people who developed CRT would tell both us and them that. But those people have been silent about this literally for decades. [Contrary to popular belief this insanity is not new. It has been around for decades with its protectors refusing to publicize it since it was largely hidden within the education system].

    This is much like the people who developed the claim that 1 in 5 women on campus are sexually assaulted. The researchers will admit when pressed that the studies are not representative and do not support the claims people make about them, but only when pinned down by someone who can hurt their professional careers. They make no effort to stop what they admit is misuse on their own which demonstrates their support for the misuse since that is literally the only use for their studies.

    This is standard activism. Women earning 73% of what men earn is the same thing. These studies are a hook designed to allow others to make political lie. So framing CRT and "Everything I Hate is White Supremacy" as different is itself misleading.

    Educators should really stop using this framework when they discuss racism.

    They can't. Without this framework there is no "white supremacy" to fight against.

    But at least we're moving past "CRT isn't in schools!". Now we're pivoting to protecting the core which ensures the rest will survive as well. But this way at least journalists can pretend to be against the obviously stupid shit without actually stopping it.

    1. Yes, as James Lindsay correctly pointed out... they're not teaching CRT to your children (understood to be: Here's an idea called Critical Race Theory, here are its ideas vs. write this down: White supremacist culture relies on 'a sense of urgency') they're DOING critical race theory TO your children. in my parenthetical, the first is teaching your children about critical race theory, the second statement is APPLYING critical race theory to your children's education.

      1. They also using a sadly typical sleazy tactic of hiring outside "experts" and "consultants" to run programs outside the official syllabus, enabling them to say "CRT is not in the curriculum of our schools."

        Whichever side makes the sleaziest arguments is the lying one. It's just that simple.

  33. Alright. Let's assume for the sake of argument that a work ethic, individual responsibility etc. are all somehow vestiges of white supremacy. What exactly is the preferred culture? Even in the antebellum south a lot of black people were very successful because they had a work ethic and ambition. Immigrants from every nation on the planet have become wealthy and as fat as they want to be by coming to this racist country with a work ethic and ambition. Would we be better off to emulate African culture(s)? How about the Taliban? Whatever it's origins, the judeo/christian/protestant work ethic has created more wealth, put more food on tables and more roofs over more heads than any other culture in human history. If you have a better proven alternative, I'm all ears. In the meantime, shut the fuck up.

    1. Some of us are tired of having the "ethic" of a particular brand of sky grandpa worship forced upon us from birth to death.

      Freedom is hard, but that doesn't mean it's not good.

      1. The problem is your side thinks freedom means freedom from challenges. Boredom is the result of no challenges, and boredom is a stressor in and of itself. What you propose isn't an opposition to Christian morals, but opposition to challenge. You totally ignore evolutionary science, that evolution only occurs under stress and challenges. You think you are opposing Christian morals, but what you really are denying is human nature. Which is typical of those seeking utopia. Christians, and related Abrahamic religions realize utopia can't be achieved on earth, progressives think if we remove all wants, we will achieve utopia. But the more affluent we've become, the less utopian out society has become. You and your ilk never admit that you are ever wrong. Therefore, you can't ever actually learn, because you only learn by making mistakes and learning from those mistakes.

        1. I just think that if you believe in maximizing individual freedom, you shouldn't be the one arguing in favor of governments forcing people to do things for their own good. Shouldn't that be me?

          If the economy advances to require less actual human labor to build wealth, shouldn't the fruits of our work and innovation be more leisure time?

          The rich certainly take a lot of vacations. Are they all being bad boys and girls using their ample leisure time? When they have a servant do their laundry, do you scold them under your breath?

          You just fear the lower classes having leisure time. It's a fine capitalist tradition. But it's no less an imposition of moral puritanism than face coverings for women.

      2. And your version of freedom denies individual freedom, ergo you aren't actually advocating for freedom.

      3. Some of us are tired of having the "ethic" of a particular brand of sky grandpa worship forced upon us from birth to death.

        And you're willing to do horrible things to black people to rid yourself of the oppressive burden of being considered in any way "ethical'.

        You don't have to tell us, we know.

      4. Some of us are tired of having the "ethic" of a particular brand of sky grandpa worship forced upon us from birth to death. Freedom is hard, but that doesn't mean it's not good.

        We're not talking about "sky grandpa worship", we're talking simple physical reality: you need to work hard, make sacrifices, and cooperate with others if you want to have a decent life.

        That's true in capitalist, Christian, socialist, Confucian, and other societies.

        Each of those ethical systems just have different means of forcing you to comply. And if you think that the capitalist/free market system is unpleasant, just wait until you experience how socialists force you to comply and pull your weight.

        1. It's not either/or. There's never been a purely socialistic or capitalistic economy, and I don't think such things are definable enough to ever exist in theory.

          We have a global market economy to allocate resources. We have governments to direct much of that allocation. You think your stock portfolio landed on earth from heaven? Nothing that you see before you is untouched by either markets or governments.

          So all we need is a little science: look at a sample of, say, all the countries in the world, and see which have the wealthiest and happiest people in them. I think a good mix of a market economy and public distributive programs works best. You think some simplistic dogmatic fantasy is best.

  34. I'd love to put some of these folks on an airplane.
    Have the flight attendant announce that, since they don't value "quantity over quality" the plane has the best fuel available, and they think there's enough to reach the destination.
    The pilots are thoroughly trained in diversity; therefore, they aren't into "perfectionism." They'll just set the plane down somewhere on the airport, instead of precisely on the end of the runway.
    Of course, it might be the wrong airport, after all they don't "worship the written word" on the tickets.
    If anyone gets into "defensiveness" they can lecture the woke folk on how their "sense of urgency" is a white construct.

    1. It's a non-starter. Airplanes are racist. In a non-racist world we wouldn't have airplanes.

  35. I have to say, this reminds me of some minorities who actually look down on people for getting decent jobs and acting professional. Getting good grades in school is "acting white" and actively discouraged.

  36. Just imagine is a schools taught "Characteristics of ' Black Blame Culture' listing every negative stereotype of black people known to man.

    1. welfare
      crack
      pants down to the fmcrack of the ass
      gang banging
      Pimpin da Hoes
      Baby mama on welfare
      .Did I miss any?

      Wanna see black negative stereotypes?

      Watch The Grio Channel on TV.

      Its supposed to be showcasing movies featuring black actors.

      99% negative stereotypes. Mostly criminals shooting something at someone.

      Im white. I emailed them telling them how disgusting that is!

    2. Yeah, it's like someone watched a comedian making jokes about how white people and black people are different and put it on a poster.

  37. Julius Streicher was executed for this. But special rules for the small hats.
    Waking up begins with an eye for an eye.

  38. That list has to be some kind of psyop meant to weaken our values and common sense.

    Die anyone out there agree with it?

    1. Somebody must since it gets put into a training class. It astonishes me how not only does it get published but someone teaches it and the students don't laugh and leave.

      1. I think the youth recognize that they’ll be persecuted by society for speaking the truth.

        They haven’t developed the character of wisdom and don’t recognize that their velvet chains of political correctness deny freedom.

        The cancel culture pushing us backwards by generations.

  39. And while the work by Okun and Katz isn't exactly the same thing as critical race theory, it's true that there's some overlap in terms of how these concepts are presented in antiracism workshops by so-called experts.

    Okun and Katz is firmly part of critical race theory; it isn't "the same thing" only in the sense that a hand and the human the hand is attached to are not "the same thing".

    To the extent that the backlash against critical race theory is partly a backlash against assistant deans of diversity asserting that writing things down on notepads is racist, it should be easy to understand why it is happening. Educators should really stop using this framework when they discuss racism.

    What educators need to do is to portray critical (race) theory for what it is: an ideology that rivals Nazis, fascism, and communism in terms of how evil and destructive it is.

    1. Don’t forget satanism.

      1. Satanism is nowhere near as evil as fascism and communism.

        1. Worshipping the devil isn’t evil?

          Satanists believe there is no difference between good and evil.

          They believe they can do whatever they want to whoever they want.

          That’s the root of all evil.

          1. Satanists are better than nazis and holocaust deniers.

            New readers: Rob Misek is a nazi and a holocaust denier.

            1. I recognize evidence of logic and science that refutes the holocaust story. I’m also demonstrating that you’re a holocaust denier,

              I mean unless you believe the Jewish leaders and media who claimed no less than 166 times between 1900 and 1945 that there were that many holocausts of 6 million Jews…YOU ARE DENYING JEWISH CLAIMS OF HOLOCAUSTS OF 6 MILLION JEWS.

              Do you mean you’re a Nazi? I’m not and your claim is a lie. Satan is the father of lies. Do you chant the Kol Nidre?

              http://wearswar.wordpress.com/2017/10/31/repeated-claims-of-6-million-jews-dying-decades-before-hitler-vs-ignored-soviet-death-camp-tolls/

              1. ^Exhibit A^

                Keep going....

                1. But they can’t refute what I already said.

  40. The Racism and Sexism the left has instilled on the USA couldn't be any more apparent that simple laws on the books.

    If you are ------------------------------
    NOT A WHITE MALE
    you're *entitled* tooooooooooooooooo.....

    Sickening; absolutely sickening where the Nazi's have taken this country.

  41. Im White.

    You dont like it?

    Send me on a fully paid vacation to the V.I. so I can get me some tan!

    Yes, working hard to get ahead is evil.

    Welfare is the future for Grajates of Pubic Skrewel.

    Enjoy that EBT!

  42. Congratulations Robby.... You are almost there.

    Actually, I think you already know... You just are afraid to commit it to writing.

    But you can see that this is the entire point of the exercise. They need dumb, uneducated and unemployable minorities who blame white people for their malaise, and they need ignorant poor white people who point at those same minorities as the reason for their own failure in life.

    So they have been working overtime at resurrecting a racial divide in the US. They desperately need us to go back to a segregated and racist society so they can run their political power grift. Once Obama ushered in a post racial society, they knew their days were numbered. That is why they began this multifaceted push to bring back racism.

    It has been years in the making. It includes undoing the work of Reason and Balko. It includes ensuring that meaningful progress on criminal justice reform cannot happen, by diverting everything into "because racism".

    It has been obvious for more than a decade now. It has been the only major policy of the DNC and their affiliated "grass roots" organizations since 2019.

    And so far they have failed.... But they are grabbing more and more of the public space. The backlash has begun... And so far it is directed at the puppet Masters and not at the puppets. It is a race though, between their constant and increasing pressure and the ability of society to push back without breaking.

    The kids today say "that's racist" ironically. They call people "cracker" as a generic insult, a product of ironic use. The whole thing is a joke to them.

    But as they move through college, they run an indoctrination gauntlet. They learn to truly love big brother.

    So the race is on.

    And so far, nobody at the national level is willing to join the defense of a civil and diverse society by calling them out for what they really are trying to do.

    1. We have dens of Politicians and Academics who have never accomplished anything useful or profitable.

      Since thet are sociopaths totally focused on themselves, its only natural they cannot perceive anything else.

      Worthless Professional Leech class..

      1. I am not worried about politicians lying and being out for power. That is like blaming a puppy for peeing on the carpet.

        I do worry about the people. If we do not demand liberty, we shall inevitably lose it.

        And without freedom of speech and a functioning 4th estate, the people are very unlikely to even notice as their freedom disappears.

        Getting it back will be much harder than losing it in the first place.

        So I rail against those who are entrusted to find the truth and bring it to the people. I rail against their feilty to those in power. Because that is the only lever we have left.

  43. This is fascinating philosophical exploration that is not ready for prime time, if by that you mean imposing it on kids, which obviously isn't really happening, and this more grist for the FOX News culture panic mill.

    The fact is there is no one correct way for humans to live, and even the most routine aspects of your own culture are specific and arbitrary and a result of historical accident.

    Maybe it's true that Calvinism led causally to the US's entrepreneurial spirit that has done things like advance science and technology, as well as the technologies of providing public welfare. Maybe that's a simplistic narrative and it has more to do with a resource-rich continent bordered by two oceans and genocide-happy invaders who discovered coal in Scotland.

    It will be a great challenge for the world to decide what kind of global culture it wants. It's the old salad bowl vs. melting pot thing. And it's a challenge to assert that liberal values are the best when liberal values themselves open space for people to question all values. I want the world to be run humanistically and empirically, but who am I to tell a Mormon or Chinese that their rituals aren't important to them? It's their life.

    And that's why I'm a US imperialist. Somebody has to set the basic ethical ground rules, and it might as well be me.

    1. It will be a great challenge for the world to decide what kind of global culture it wants.

      The technology which makes such global decisions possible (even if not feasible) is a product of white supremacy culture. 🙂

      1. White European.

        NO other civilisation have ever accomplished what thats done in 100 years.

        1. Want a trophy?

      2. Yeah, someone discovered coal in Scotland. Someone had to be first.

        What do you want to do with that information, and does it involve wearing sheets and burning crosses?

        1. Wait, so are you claiming that Western civilization was an accident caused solely by an early application of fossil fuels?

          1. What do you think it was? Be very specific.

    2. “ The fact is there is no one correct way for humans to live”

      And as you are a leftist who is not that bright, you certainly draw the conclusion that we can live ANY way we want because you don’t see that between correct and incorrect there still exist better and worse.

      1. Sure, and besides utilitarian assumptions about human welfare, there are certain Darwinian considerations.

        But if we're lobbing nukes at each other simply because we don't like the cuts of each other's cultural jibs, if nothing else, we've proved that a culture of modern technology was a bad choice.

  44. I assume that "white supremacy culture" refers to racism, but the claimed characteristics shown here are completely non-falsifiable and non-empirical, and do not resemble attributes of any race.

    The definitions of "race" and "racism" are being rendered meaningless.

    1. the points are economics and RELIGIOUS HATRED.

      Typical for radical Communist Liberals.

      1. Wrong again.
        Reagan Democrat describes me better. (Or is that what you meant?))

  45. Can we make a "Blackness" chart to counter the whiteness chart?

    1. According to the chart, the metric/ goal is failure.

      And POLYTHEISM.

      Try this:

      welfare
      crack
      pants down to the crack of the ass
      gang banging
      Pimpin da Hoes
      Baby mama on welfare
      .Did I miss any?

      Thats how the Mainstream Media portray black people.

      Perhaps the Media are the problem.

      1. Do you watch a Ronald Reagan campaign ad on repeat and think that's the entire media?

        1. Poor Tony. Wasn't even alive during Reagan yet talking trash.... like every liberal.

      2. hi crack baby

      3. To be fair, blacks are also often portrayed as upper middle class families engaging in "white behaviors" in the media.

  46. Dobie Gillis show just now on Decades TV. 1960s rerun.

    College prof lecturing college students to NOT express bias against night school students who work real day jobs.

    Told the class those night students they are looking down on know more about life...

    EXACTLY the same issue as this.

  47. When I read this article and listen to the George Washington University YouTube, all I can say is how insulting this must be to blacks and other minorities. The implication is white society has these western European standards (being on time, writing it down, work ethic, and on and on) and blacks/other minorities CAN'T KEEP UP. If we want the USA to be number one in the world, we have to WORK for it. Dumbing down the system isn't the solution.

  48. The claims that these attributes belong to a "white supremacy culture" are just absurd. If you think working hard and planning for the future are racist you clearly don't know what racism means.

    Granted some of the characteristics listed in the chart, like female beauty based on the blonde, fair skinned ideal could argue for white bias, but they could also reflect the history of the United States which began as British colonies. Of course our dominant culture is informed by English common law and Protestant traditions and values, that is largely who founded this country.

    While many of listed aspects of white that the authors attribute to race are the Eurocentric roots to be expected from a group of former European colonies, the rest do not belong to a white supremacy culture as someone said. They have nothing to do with race or skin color at all. In fact they are aspects of the true dominant culture in the United States, the Consumer culture. These are the traits that give one worth in our capitalist system. We must constantly be striving for peak performance to increase our income so that we can spend it to keep the economy growing. Time is money and money is everything. Money can buy anything and the pursuit of it is the primary motivation behind all else that happens today. Some might argue that power is the purpose behind the accumulation of wealth, or do people desire power in order to enrich themselves even more. The answer to that will have to come from someone who has some of both, not from me I am afraid.

  49. nothing is gonna stop these fascists except a good old fashioned civil war...and since the two sides are mixed in amongst each other, partition is not a solution...which just leaves extermination....gird ur loins...

  50. No please. STFU and get back to teaching math, science, and English. Nobody CARES what any of you think.

  51. SJWs keep trying to hide that infographic because the mask slipped too hard. They want you to believe that this is all about equality and civil rights, but what they're really talking about is blatantly racist Marxism. The world is majority non-white. Is the world white supremacist for sharing most of the values listed?

    The real problem here is that those values are primarily responsible for the resource boon and rapid development of human civilization over the past 300 years. At that point, one must ask; if racism produces such positive results for everyone, maybe it isn't racism after all?

  52. Next up- brushing your teeth, showering more than once a week, and wiping after going number 2 are part of white supremacist culture.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.