I think it’s harder to accept anyone took it seriously in the first place. When I first read it I had like a page of notes every couple pages and basically identified it as racist maunderings of a racist ( or even Racist) person who was having a crisis about how they such a wonderful left aligned *totally not racist* person could be so racist.
1). Everyone is a small “r” racist. That is how brains work and how everyone behaves. Brains detect patterns and make generalizations. Black people do this, Serbians, Chinese, Arabs, Yoruba, everyone, it is a part of every culture. Even fake ones. Give a bunch of people green and purple shirts and have them work in teams, and people will start forming beliefs about green shirt people.
It’s not some special preserve of Europeans or Americans, and not a reason for self hatred or flagellation. Most sane people try to just be fair to others and get on with their life.
2). Big R “Racists” aren’t good, but are not at all a big force in our society except from this movement itself hilariously. And Deangelo admits to some wild behaviors/thoughts in the book. Deep racism against both blacks and whites. It is very clear that to her people are their melanin content. Which is um, the core of racism.
Anyway the whole thing is just coved with zero erudition or nuance. More a bad and deluded attempt at self therapy than anything helpful. Plus it is frequently just wrong on the facts and stating things which are false about history etc.
What’s kind of hilarious to me is that if Robin had been less lazy and thrown in a couple of citations, the claim of plagiarism wouldn’t be made against her. If only white people had a better work ethic…
I’m just excited for when Jeff ghostwrites her sua cuppa where she explains that it was all the fault of the institutionally racist organisations she had to work at, the paper that discovered it, and the word processing software with its copy/paste function which let her copy stuff without making her first acknowledge and reflect on her privilege.
Lol! I wondered what tea had to do with it. Thought maybe it had something to do with sugar making the medicine go down. But since I’m in the middle of an existential crisis, what do I know?
No ghostwriting needed: she already wrote it - her 2021 book “Nice Racism: How Progressive White People Perpetuate Racial Harm”. Except she forgot the chapter on how to “plagiarize (and profit off of) scholars of color” or in her terms, scholarly slavery.
Ugh, I was temporarily forced to endure a book study of "Nice Racism" at my workplace, and in our discussion of *literally the first chapter* I brought up some questions about her interpretation of history. Specifically, that she was just flatly wrong about a few key events. One of my colleagues said, "What if you engaged with the argument as if it were true rather than scrutinizing it as true or false?" I said, basically, it forking matters to me whether or not it's true; everything else about its credibility is downstream from that.
Shortly thereafter, I discovered it wasn't mandatory to do the book study and dropped out.
“What if you engaged with the argument as if it were true?” Wow… I feel like this was the premise used by Jim Jones and Marshall Applewhite to start their fan clubs.
Good for you for actually raising the questions though. Not too many people have the honesty, integrity or courage these days do speak truth in a room filled with lies especially where something as valuable as their livelihood is concerned. Our world needs more of you.
In the past couple of days I've looked at two theatre companies websites (I was interested in auditioning for future plays). One is a community theatre, the other is a major university's Theatre Department. Both have strong antiracism statements taken straight out of DiAngelo's writings. It's still alive and well.
Well that’s certainly gross (your conclusion, not integration)!
In fact, it’s a rejection of integration and assimilation (both now coded as surrender of a minority group’s culture) as a path to dignity for all that seems to be the cause.
What 'dignity' is there in forced race-mixing? 'Assimilation' is already an anti-White position. You're forcing Whites to 'assimilate' to non-Whites. If you force non-Whites to 'assimilate' to Whites, that's 'racism'.
The problem is race-mixing. All of of the 'solutions' you propose - assimilation, integration - are required because of the problem *created* by race-mixing.
Who's "forcing" "race-mixing"? Are you suggesting segregation is the way to go? Criminalizing inter-racial marriage? Because, we did try all that for a while, and the results were...not great. But you do you, ubermensch player. I'll be over here enjoying life with all my untermensch friends and family.
Obviously you know nothing about American 'civil rights' law as it affects freedom of association by Whites. In the USA access to White people is considered a human right. Whites are not allowed to have all-White communities (though non-Whites are openly allowed to do so).
I submit to you that the criminalization of White racial interests is going much worse than any criminalization of race-mixing ever could have.
As for your reference to 'ubermensch' and 'untermensch' that's your fantasy, not mine.
Whites have been taught to hate themselves. Any White person asserting their interest as a White person causes self-hating Whites to recoil in horror and make the signs of their religion ('slavery!', 'Hitler!'). To self-hating Whites the idea of any White sasserting racial interests is heresy.
Segregation was good for Whites. Since I'm not a self-hating White, it doesn't matter to me if non-Whites didn't fare well under that. Just as non-Whites do not care that Whites are not faring well under the current system of forced race-mixing and melanin privilege.
But I don't support 'segregation' because it still allowed access to Whites by non-Whites. What is now required is a devolution of all of federal power to the states and local governments. No more 'free movement' of persons, goods, law, contracts, or money. Pluralist Separatism.
The inability of people like you to respect the interests of people like me means the entire federal system has to be dismantled.
And this time, if it comes to a contest of arms, don't count on 'winning'.
Which scenario is worse: 1. DiAngelo is a gifted and talented grifter who was knowingly able to seize the moment and rise to a place of prominence in the zeitgeist (before eventually being caught out); or 2. DiAngelo is a true believer who is so incompetent and so lacking in self awareness that she is unironically guilty of being exactly the type of person she condemns by mistake?
I think it’s the second one. She seems broadly oblivious, like how she doesn’t realize that her worldview is the most racist thing in the world because it sees nonwhite people (and mostly just Black people and Native Americans, because Asian people and Hispanic people barely exist in her dialogue) as perpetual victims forever at the mercy of white people.
Victimhood is very popular nowadays! It’s always so good if you’re the victim , because then you can feel superior or even sacred. Like trans people who are now considered holy by some!
I'm not sure which is worse, but I think 2 is more accurate in this case. I think true believers are far more common than talented grifters, although both exist.
Normally, I snobbishly dismiss hamfisted sarcasm like this, but I think this particular ox calls for it. Also, you do hamfisted better than almost anyone.
“Ironically, DiAngelo’s website contains an accountability statement in which she insists that the work of people of color must always be cited if they have “informed your thinking.””
I am shocked that an esteemed academic such Robin DiAngelo has been found to be a fraud! If that wasn’t bad enough, now we find out that she stole from people of color for no other reason than to elevate herself to a place where she could openly talk down to people of color!
David Duke, are you paying attention to this? You’ve been doing it all wrong!
If you enjoyed Jeff’s piece, you’ll absolutely savor pre-bonkers Matt Taibbi’s ruthless takedown of DiAngelo several years earlier. https://www.racket.news/p/on-white-fragility
Jeff, believe it or not, I've had trouble with Robin's arguments from the beginning. She likes to asert that everyone who questions her is guilty of "white fragility." In other words, critical thinking is not permitted. And yet, it has been my experience that people who seem to be the most fragile--the most intollerant when it comes to challenges to their preferred belief systems--are people on the "woke Left."
Imagine how indignant they would be if, say, the Catholic Church was exposed covering up archaelogical evidence which might cast doubt on long-held religious beliefs. I've never come across people more zealous, and more dedicated to their belief systems no matter what, than our "inclusive", against prejudice", "equality for all--except all who disagree with us" woke folks.
Oh, and by the way, I never knew how great a country our country is until Vice-President Harris started telling us a couple weeks ago. Family values and make our country great are what she's campaigning on. I could be wrong, but I think I can put her in touch with somebody sho could get her a deal on "Make America Great" hats.
So there's a group in this country called Evangelicals...you might wanna check them out. They have some concerning levels of intolerance "when it comes to challenges to their preferred belief systems".
Davis, thanks so much for your coment. Unfortunately, you're exactly right when you talk about evangelicals not liking challenges to their beliefs. Perhaps the difference is in how these two groups are treated by the "politically correct." Several decades ago, it was fashionable to pick on Christian fundamentalists. I was guilty of some of that, myself. "Those pelple are kind of backward, probably not well-educated, and they're kind of extreme when it comes to Christianity." However, if you've noticed, the range of Christians its fashionable to hold in contempt has expanded to include pretty much all "conservative Christians." Even when reporting international news, our mainstream news media doesn't report on the constant, sometimes brutal treatment of Christians in places like Africa and Asia--especially in the Middle East. So, evangelicals have already been justly , and frequently accused of intolerance. The "woke" folks, on the other hand, have, for the most part, not. Jeff, you deserve a lot of credit for writing your article. Will it cause NPR, and the rest of the mainstream news media to become a little more balanced? I'm skeptical. What's most interesting, though, is what all this shows us about the power of belief systems. We have guys like Richard Dawkins, blaming "religion" for causing most of the wars and conflicts in the world over the past several thousand years. So, now, up step the "woke" bunch. "Religion" is pretty much forbidden, altogether. The "cause", or "the party" is the thing. They've shown us as much or more intolerance than any religious group has shown us. I have to conclude from this that it's not actually religion as such that necessarily causes intolerance. It's the need to put our faith in a particular belief system--one that can't be questioned. You don't need a God. You don't need "Holy books." Belief in whoever is instramental in founding or promoting "the cause" or "the party" makes that person and his/her writings the new "Holy." "You can't be against white-against-black racism unless you're an '"anti-racist"' as defined by Mr. Kendi." "You can't be for gender equality unless you say and do exactly what the politically correct feminists do." To give you an example, several months ago, a high school student in Davidson county, North Carolina, was suspended for three days for using the term "illegal immigrant." I still challenge political correctness by using the term "Washington Red Skins." We need to encourage true diversity and inclusivity by welcoming diversity of thought. We need to encourage open and respectful discussions--such as this one. That's why, Davis, I thank you again for your comment.
Just Evangelicals? Not Catholics, Muslims, or Jews? I think you have “intolerance” confused with “religious freedom”. The fact that your career or even life is not endangered when joining the crowd in poking fun of Evangelicals somewhat offsets the consequences of their intolerance (unless your definition of intolerance is someone with a difference of opinion). I really haven’t heard of Evangelicals chopping off the heads of people who don’t believe in the infallibility of the Bible. But of course, I don’t read the news every day.
No, I got it. However, I've heard from so many people who took Robin's opinions as established fact, that I was becoming afraid that woke media and woke educational thought would win out. Now, Jeff, I hope you don't write an op-ed stating that I'm as full of it as Robin is. (It might be the truth, but I still hope you don't write about it.) :)
Next we are going to find out that she is actually a Grand Wizard of the ladies auxiliary of the Western Washington chapter of the KKK and her secret project was to make everyone in America think about whiteness every day…
I think it’s harder to accept anyone took it seriously in the first place. When I first read it I had like a page of notes every couple pages and basically identified it as racist maunderings of a racist ( or even Racist) person who was having a crisis about how they such a wonderful left aligned *totally not racist* person could be so racist.
1). Everyone is a small “r” racist. That is how brains work and how everyone behaves. Brains detect patterns and make generalizations. Black people do this, Serbians, Chinese, Arabs, Yoruba, everyone, it is a part of every culture. Even fake ones. Give a bunch of people green and purple shirts and have them work in teams, and people will start forming beliefs about green shirt people.
It’s not some special preserve of Europeans or Americans, and not a reason for self hatred or flagellation. Most sane people try to just be fair to others and get on with their life.
2). Big R “Racists” aren’t good, but are not at all a big force in our society except from this movement itself hilariously. And Deangelo admits to some wild behaviors/thoughts in the book. Deep racism against both blacks and whites. It is very clear that to her people are their melanin content. Which is um, the core of racism.
Anyway the whole thing is just coved with zero erudition or nuance. More a bad and deluded attempt at self therapy than anything helpful. Plus it is frequently just wrong on the facts and stating things which are false about history etc.
I found some of her anecdotes among the most cringeworthy I ever read. Heal thyself, Robin.
Whenever I hear the word 'nuance' I reach for my revolver.
Use a shotgun...covers more area
Who can afford shotgun shells these days? I’m reduced to rock throwing.
I'm Old School. :)
Your terms are acceptable
lol, like
Less nuanced
My favorite comment on the interweb today
I have been silently mulling something along the lines of your “small r” hypothesis for quite a while. I appreciate seeing it on a page.
Now all that’s left for me is to discover whether one can mull in anything BUT silence…
What’s kind of hilarious to me is that if Robin had been less lazy and thrown in a couple of citations, the claim of plagiarism wouldn’t be made against her. If only white people had a better work ethic…
https://youtu.be/yR1QL7CJltQ?si=VcCeLFGHnVwUIo_c “Im beginning to think Robin Diangelo was not the brilliant tactician i thought she was”
I tried to find a way to work this clip into the article. Glad you posted it.
Hilarious!
lol
I’m just excited for when Jeff ghostwrites her sua cuppa where she explains that it was all the fault of the institutionally racist organisations she had to work at, the paper that discovered it, and the word processing software with its copy/paste function which let her copy stuff without making her first acknowledge and reflect on her privilege.
Argh. Sua *culpa*. Thank you autocorrect for making it sound she was going to do something g out of Mary Poppins.
Lol! I wondered what tea had to do with it. Thought maybe it had something to do with sugar making the medicine go down. But since I’m in the middle of an existential crisis, what do I know?
No ghostwriting needed: she already wrote it - her 2021 book “Nice Racism: How Progressive White People Perpetuate Racial Harm”. Except she forgot the chapter on how to “plagiarize (and profit off of) scholars of color” or in her terms, scholarly slavery.
I remember being force fed White Fragility like it was yesterday. I always just felt like DiAngelo was projecting more than anything!
Ugh, I was temporarily forced to endure a book study of "Nice Racism" at my workplace, and in our discussion of *literally the first chapter* I brought up some questions about her interpretation of history. Specifically, that she was just flatly wrong about a few key events. One of my colleagues said, "What if you engaged with the argument as if it were true rather than scrutinizing it as true or false?" I said, basically, it forking matters to me whether or not it's true; everything else about its credibility is downstream from that.
Shortly thereafter, I discovered it wasn't mandatory to do the book study and dropped out.
“What if you engaged with the argument as if it were true?” Wow… I feel like this was the premise used by Jim Jones and Marshall Applewhite to start their fan clubs.
Good for you for actually raising the questions though. Not too many people have the honesty, integrity or courage these days do speak truth in a room filled with lies especially where something as valuable as their livelihood is concerned. Our world needs more of you.
But did you end up doing the work in this brave new post-Floyd world?
No! I guess i just prefer being a racist
White fragility is a food? Like white bread .. with no nutrients? All fake? Well, shiver me timbers!
I was emotionally and spiritually held at gunpoint until i finished reading the book and changed my ways
Even whiter if you spread mayo on it.
Thank you. Another thing I forgot. White Fragility. How do people make these things up?
It’s not made up. It’s the name of a new post-modern West Texas Swing band.
I thought they broke up.
In the past couple of days I've looked at two theatre companies websites (I was interested in auditioning for future plays). One is a community theatre, the other is a major university's Theatre Department. Both have strong antiracism statements taken straight out of DiAngelo's writings. It's still alive and well.
Sad but true. DiAngelo is a symptom, not the cause.
What is the cause in your view? To me the cause is obvious: Race-mixing.
Well that’s certainly gross (your conclusion, not integration)!
In fact, it’s a rejection of integration and assimilation (both now coded as surrender of a minority group’s culture) as a path to dignity for all that seems to be the cause.
So, which do you prefer, a melting pot or a salad? I’m a fan of wheat rolls myself.
What 'dignity' is there in forced race-mixing? 'Assimilation' is already an anti-White position. You're forcing Whites to 'assimilate' to non-Whites. If you force non-Whites to 'assimilate' to Whites, that's 'racism'.
The problem is race-mixing. All of of the 'solutions' you propose - assimilation, integration - are required because of the problem *created* by race-mixing.
Who's "forcing" "race-mixing"? Are you suggesting segregation is the way to go? Criminalizing inter-racial marriage? Because, we did try all that for a while, and the results were...not great. But you do you, ubermensch player. I'll be over here enjoying life with all my untermensch friends and family.
Obviously you know nothing about American 'civil rights' law as it affects freedom of association by Whites. In the USA access to White people is considered a human right. Whites are not allowed to have all-White communities (though non-Whites are openly allowed to do so).
I submit to you that the criminalization of White racial interests is going much worse than any criminalization of race-mixing ever could have.
As for your reference to 'ubermensch' and 'untermensch' that's your fantasy, not mine.
Whites have been taught to hate themselves. Any White person asserting their interest as a White person causes self-hating Whites to recoil in horror and make the signs of their religion ('slavery!', 'Hitler!'). To self-hating Whites the idea of any White sasserting racial interests is heresy.
Segregation was good for Whites. Since I'm not a self-hating White, it doesn't matter to me if non-Whites didn't fare well under that. Just as non-Whites do not care that Whites are not faring well under the current system of forced race-mixing and melanin privilege.
But I don't support 'segregation' because it still allowed access to Whites by non-Whites. What is now required is a devolution of all of federal power to the states and local governments. No more 'free movement' of persons, goods, law, contracts, or money. Pluralist Separatism.
The inability of people like you to respect the interests of people like me means the entire federal system has to be dismantled.
And this time, if it comes to a contest of arms, don't count on 'winning'.
Which scenario is worse: 1. DiAngelo is a gifted and talented grifter who was knowingly able to seize the moment and rise to a place of prominence in the zeitgeist (before eventually being caught out); or 2. DiAngelo is a true believer who is so incompetent and so lacking in self awareness that she is unironically guilty of being exactly the type of person she condemns by mistake?
I think it’s the second one. She seems broadly oblivious, like how she doesn’t realize that her worldview is the most racist thing in the world because it sees nonwhite people (and mostly just Black people and Native Americans, because Asian people and Hispanic people barely exist in her dialogue) as perpetual victims forever at the mercy of white people.
Victimhood is very popular nowadays! It’s always so good if you’re the victim , because then you can feel superior or even sacred. Like trans people who are now considered holy by some!
I'm not sure which is worse, but I think 2 is more accurate in this case. I think true believers are far more common than talented grifters, although both exist.
I’ll take one from column A and one from column B.
Yes. A grifting True Believer, I suspect.
As for Jimmy Fallon inviting DiAngelo on his show, glowing over her presence, and nodding along to what she said, I just have one thing to say:
This wouldn't happen on the Maurer Hour, my proposed late night comedy show with Jeff Maurer as host.
Love this! Except let's go Colbert Report and call it the Maurer Haurer.
I’d go for a late-late show called “One More Hour With Maurer”
This is so cathartic 😆
It shocked me that someone who obsessed over race and marketed the idea of being obsessed with race would one day be revealed to lack integrity.
lol
Normally, I snobbishly dismiss hamfisted sarcasm like this, but I think this particular ox calls for it. Also, you do hamfisted better than almost anyone.
LIKE!
I am shocked that gambling is going on in this establishment.
Even Yahoo is on to her antics:
“Ironically, DiAngelo’s website contains an accountability statement in which she insists that the work of people of color must always be cited if they have “informed your thinking.””
I am shocked that an esteemed academic such Robin DiAngelo has been found to be a fraud! If that wasn’t bad enough, now we find out that she stole from people of color for no other reason than to elevate herself to a place where she could openly talk down to people of color!
David Duke, are you paying attention to this? You’ve been doing it all wrong!
Moderately Trained Border Collie 2024!!!!!1!1!!! 🇺🇸💪🏼🇺🇸💪🏼🇺🇸💪🏼
If you enjoyed Jeff’s piece, you’ll absolutely savor pre-bonkers Matt Taibbi’s ruthless takedown of DiAngelo several years earlier. https://www.racket.news/p/on-white-fragility
How is Taibbi bonkers now?
Thank you for sharing! Love Matt but had not read this article. Quite brilliant…
Jeff, believe it or not, I've had trouble with Robin's arguments from the beginning. She likes to asert that everyone who questions her is guilty of "white fragility." In other words, critical thinking is not permitted. And yet, it has been my experience that people who seem to be the most fragile--the most intollerant when it comes to challenges to their preferred belief systems--are people on the "woke Left."
Imagine how indignant they would be if, say, the Catholic Church was exposed covering up archaelogical evidence which might cast doubt on long-held religious beliefs. I've never come across people more zealous, and more dedicated to their belief systems no matter what, than our "inclusive", against prejudice", "equality for all--except all who disagree with us" woke folks.
Oh, and by the way, I never knew how great a country our country is until Vice-President Harris started telling us a couple weeks ago. Family values and make our country great are what she's campaigning on. I could be wrong, but I think I can put her in touch with somebody sho could get her a deal on "Make America Great" hats.
I honestly can’t tell if you got the joke or not.
So there's a group in this country called Evangelicals...you might wanna check them out. They have some concerning levels of intolerance "when it comes to challenges to their preferred belief systems".
Davis, thanks so much for your coment. Unfortunately, you're exactly right when you talk about evangelicals not liking challenges to their beliefs. Perhaps the difference is in how these two groups are treated by the "politically correct." Several decades ago, it was fashionable to pick on Christian fundamentalists. I was guilty of some of that, myself. "Those pelple are kind of backward, probably not well-educated, and they're kind of extreme when it comes to Christianity." However, if you've noticed, the range of Christians its fashionable to hold in contempt has expanded to include pretty much all "conservative Christians." Even when reporting international news, our mainstream news media doesn't report on the constant, sometimes brutal treatment of Christians in places like Africa and Asia--especially in the Middle East. So, evangelicals have already been justly , and frequently accused of intolerance. The "woke" folks, on the other hand, have, for the most part, not. Jeff, you deserve a lot of credit for writing your article. Will it cause NPR, and the rest of the mainstream news media to become a little more balanced? I'm skeptical. What's most interesting, though, is what all this shows us about the power of belief systems. We have guys like Richard Dawkins, blaming "religion" for causing most of the wars and conflicts in the world over the past several thousand years. So, now, up step the "woke" bunch. "Religion" is pretty much forbidden, altogether. The "cause", or "the party" is the thing. They've shown us as much or more intolerance than any religious group has shown us. I have to conclude from this that it's not actually religion as such that necessarily causes intolerance. It's the need to put our faith in a particular belief system--one that can't be questioned. You don't need a God. You don't need "Holy books." Belief in whoever is instramental in founding or promoting "the cause" or "the party" makes that person and his/her writings the new "Holy." "You can't be against white-against-black racism unless you're an '"anti-racist"' as defined by Mr. Kendi." "You can't be for gender equality unless you say and do exactly what the politically correct feminists do." To give you an example, several months ago, a high school student in Davidson county, North Carolina, was suspended for three days for using the term "illegal immigrant." I still challenge political correctness by using the term "Washington Red Skins." We need to encourage true diversity and inclusivity by welcoming diversity of thought. We need to encourage open and respectful discussions--such as this one. That's why, Davis, I thank you again for your comment.
Just Evangelicals? Not Catholics, Muslims, or Jews? I think you have “intolerance” confused with “religious freedom”. The fact that your career or even life is not endangered when joining the crowd in poking fun of Evangelicals somewhat offsets the consequences of their intolerance (unless your definition of intolerance is someone with a difference of opinion). I really haven’t heard of Evangelicals chopping off the heads of people who don’t believe in the infallibility of the Bible. But of course, I don’t read the news every day.
No, I got it. However, I've heard from so many people who took Robin's opinions as established fact, that I was becoming afraid that woke media and woke educational thought would win out. Now, Jeff, I hope you don't write an op-ed stating that I'm as full of it as Robin is. (It might be the truth, but I still hope you don't write about it.) :)
Next we are going to find out that she is actually a Grand Wizard of the ladies auxiliary of the Western Washington chapter of the KKK and her secret project was to make everyone in America think about whiteness every day…
I think that’s revealed to be true in Matt Walsh’s “Am I Racist”!
hahaha, good one