Several weeks ago, on May 13th, 2023, President Biden gave a speech to the graduating class of Howard University in which he identified “white supremacy as the most dangerous terrorist threat, to the nation.” If one scans the country’s major newspapers it isn’t difficult to find headlines that seem to support this claim.
Is It True?
Racism exists, to argue otherwise would be to deny reality. Racism is hatred and hatred will likely always be with us. However, there is a not-so-subtle difference between arguing that racism exists and that white supremacy is an existential threat to society. There has been a black president after all, something that many thought they would never see. And despite what activists may say, it is clearly an indication that societal racism is declining. However, anecdote, as they say, is not evidence, so what evidence do we have?
There are many examples, from many different sectors of society that point to a decline in racism.
These include entertainment:
Sports:
And Politics:
An examination of opinions regarding interracial marriage, a practice broadly outlawed prior to 1967, also points to a decline in racial bias:
Despite this data, more Americans believe racism is the most important problem facing the US since the Civil Rights era.
Want some new merch while supporting free speech? Check out our store!
American’s perception of the situation diverges widely from these long-term trends due to three tactics employed by those seeking to keep the narrative alive:
Expanding the definition of “racism,”
Broadening who can be a white supremacist, and
Strategically use of data.
Anti-Racism, Colorblindness, and Microaggressions
On August 28, 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. gave his “I have a Dream Speech” in which he imagined a day when his four children would “one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” Today, per the tenants of Anti-Racism and the new colorblindness, Reverend King would be dreaming of a racist world. Where once colorblindness was viewed as a requirement of equal treatment, it is now seen as detrimental to it. Per the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, “true color-blindness is not only impossible, but actively harmful toward anti-racist work. The goal of anti-racist work is not to make race invisible, but rather to make systems of inequity based on race apparent to all so they can be dismantled. For that to happen, we need to see race.”
Anti-racism is founded on the principle that racism is the “original sin” of white people and like original sin salvation can only be obtained through confession. This is why so many anti-racist diversity sessions appear less like training and more like Maoist struggle sessions designed to elicit confessions of guilt and instill ideological anti-racist teachings.
While anti-racism flips desired behavior on its head vis-à-vis colorblindness, microaggressions see racism in every social misstep. Microaggressions are essentially verbal slights that “communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative attitudes toward stigmatized or culturally marginalized groups.” Examples include the following statements and questions:
When I look at you, I don’t see color.
My best friend is black.
Where are you from?
You are so articulate.
Everyone can succeed in this society if they work hard enough.
To most people these are harmless but to anti-racist activists, these are clear indications of racism. However, before jumping on the anti-racist bandwagon, one might want to read New York Magazine which published an article asking if anti-racism is just another way to push white supremacy. It seems we are racists no matter what we do.
“Not so White” Supremacist
At one time, “white supremacy” was an easy concept to understand. The Antebellum South with its institutionalized slavery was white supremacist. The pre-Civil Rights Act South with segregation and Jim Crow laws was a white supremacist society. South Africa under Apartheid was another clear example. The common characteristic was that each believed white people were superior to other races and had laws designed to maintain white power and privilege. The passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which made discrimination illegal would seem to have sounded the death knell of American white supremacy.
However, thanks to recent developments in academia and activist doctrine, “white supremacy” is no longer as simple as it once was. Critical Race Theory, intersectionality, and structural racism have combined to redefine “white supremacy.” No longer is it necessary for there to be laws protecting white power, white supremacy now exists in any society in which white people enjoy structural advantages.
This redefinition has also broadened what constitutes an act of white supremacy. As social systems, not laws, are now the foundations of white supremacy, privilege, not rights are the standard against which actions are judged. The fact that we all have the same rights is irrelevant if white people have the privilege of finding children’s books that overwhelmingly represent their race.
Diluting the definition of white supremacy also expands on who can perform racism and be a white supremacist. If society is to blame, then it is the effect of the actions not who performs them that defines whether the act is racist or not. Articles pointing to this trend include:
Lies, Damn Lies, and the Media
For data and statistics to provide meaning they must be examined and used objectively. This is difficult to expect at a time when the value of objectivity is questioned and when academics take more pride in being activists than in being accurate. Likewise, for social ills to be addressed it must be possible for everyone, regardless of political or ideological background, to speak freely. This is difficult in a society where only those on the left feel comfortable speaking:
Activist goals and conservative reluctance to speak up combine to ensure that only data that supports white supremacy are advanced. Examples include:
White-on-black crime is highlighted while black-on-black crime is largely ignored. An example of this includes the death of Jordan Neely which received countless headlines while Corde Scott’s death at the hands of his stepfather was largely ignored.
Police killings of blacks are documented to such an extent that the public’s perception is dramatically out of touch with reality.
Economic narratives are presented highlighting disparities between whites, Hispanics, and blacks while ignoring groups that complicated the narrative:
While racists and white supremacists no doubt exist, it is clear that neither is the threat that we are led to believe. Instead, three groups push this narrative for their own benefit:
Activists who leverage the narrative to raise money and keep their jobs
The media which gets “clicks” and sells ads
Politicians, in this case on the left, who stir up the base to gain and remain in power
To paraphrase Thomas Sowell, politicians, race hustlers, and people who get a sense of superiority by denouncing others as 'racists' would have us believe that racism and white supremacy are greater threats than they really are. White supremacy’s existence depends on a willingness to ignore facts that tell us progress, despite the occasional setback, is real. Defeating racism requires honesty and vigilance, not only by calling it out when we see it but by having the courage to speak up and call a lie a lie when we are fed false narratives by those who would keep society divided for their own purposes.
Couldn't have said it any better. Well done!
Thanks.