“Anti-Racism” Is Racism in Disguise

Anti-racism demonstrators in Charlottesville.

by Hans Bader

America’s colleges, media, and cultural institutions are being swept by the ideology of “anti-racism.” It openly advocates racial discrimination against white people, and promotes bigoted, lower expectations for black people.

“Rationality” and “hard work” are vestiges of racism, declared the “anti-racism” web site of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington, D.C. It claimed that virtues like “hard work,” “self-reliance,” being “polite,” and being on time are all a product of the “white dominant culture.” So, too, are normal grammar, the scientific method, and its emphasis on “objective, rational linear thinking,” according to a chart the Smithsonian posted.

“The ‘anti-racism’ sweeping institutions still ends up rendering black people as somehow different, other, unable to meet even basic standards,” notes Thomas Chatterton Williams, a black writer for the New York Times magazine and Harpers. He points to a recent set of “anti-racist” directives from the English Department at Rutgers University, which deemphasize grammar rules that conflict with black slang.

Being an “anti-racist” means advocating discrimination to transform society. The bible of “anti-racism” is “How to Be an Antiracist,” by Boston University’s Ibram X. Kendi. The “key concept” from How to Be an Antiracist is that to remedy the underrepresentation of minority groups, you need to engage in discrimination in the opposite direction — i.e., discriminate against whites.

As the book explains: “The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.”

Kendi’s tenets are now an article of faith on America’s college campuses. For example, Cornell’s president told her university to read “‘How to Be an Antiracist,’ by National Book Award winner Ibram X. Kendi.”

Dr. Kendi’s views are celebrated by the Washington Post and the New York Times. The Times touts Kendi’s axiom that “When I see racial disparities, I see racism.”

Kendi’s claim ignores the fact that many racial disparities are not caused by racism. For example, Latinos live three years longer than whites, on average, even though doctors don’t discriminate in their favor. Asians make more money than whites, on average. And while blacks make less money than whites, on average, immigrants from African countries like Nigeria actually make more money than whites do.

Racial disparities exist everywhere in society and the world, often for reasons unrelated to racism, as the black economist Thomas Sowell chronicles in his book Discrimination and Disparities. To abolish racial disparities would require a totalitarian government, says black economist Glenn Loury.

In the past, studies often found that racial and gender disparities were caused by factors other than racism or sexism. But now, researchers are now being pressured to not publish such studies, as university officials “mobilize” their “research capacity” to fight “racial disparities,” and professors call for the punishment of colleagues whose research does not comply with “anti-racism” litmus tests.

The courts have rejected the idea that disparities automatically constitute discrimination. In its Belk decision, an appeals court ruled in 2001 that a racial “disparity” in school-discipline rates does not “constitute discrimination,” even if most suspended students are black — as long as school discipline rules are applied in a colorblind fashion.

Similarly, the Supreme Court ruled that racial disparities in who received city contracts did not constitute discrimination, when the statistics didn’t take into account whether black people were qualified to receive a contract from the city. The fact that the City of Richmond was half black but contractors were almost entirely white did not, without more, prove discrimination. As the Supreme Court noted, it is “completely unrealistic” to think that in the absence of racism, minorities will be represented in a field “in lockstep proportion to their representation in the local population.” As a result, the city could not give contracts to black contractors based on their race, because that unconstitutionally discriminated against white contractors. (See Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. (1989)).

In the workplace, a law known as Title VII does sometimes treat unintentional racial disparities as discriminatory — but only in limited circumstances, not the broad way that Dr. Kendi advocates. This area of the law is known as “disparate impact” law. But even under disparate impact law, a racial disparity only matters if it takes into account minimal qualifications for a position, and only if the disparity cannot be justified by “business necessity.” So while an employer can’t require a high-school diploma in hiring for an unskilled position if very few black people in the area have a high-school diploma, it can require that people applying for skilled positions have the required credential, even if very few black people have the credential.

For example, in its Wards Cove decision, the Supreme Court ruled an employer was not liable for racial disparities between its unskilled jobs (which were overwhelmingly held by minorities) and its skilled jobs (which were held overwhelmingly by whites), because people holding the former positions simply didn’t have the qualifications needed for the latter positions.

Similarly, in the Mozee decision, an appeals court ruled that higher black discipline rates did not show illegal “disparate impact” where black employees had more prior offenses. A person’s qualifications for discipline are affected by their conduct — not how many other people of the same race have been disciplined.

In short, qualifications and the content of your character matter most — not “disparities,” as Dr. Kendi and other self-styled “anti-racists” suggest. Racism is bad precisely because it ignores people’s qualifications, and the content of their character.

Hans Bader is an attorney living in Northern Virginia. This column was published originally at Liberty Unyielding.

There are currently no comments highlighted.

87 responses to ““Anti-Racism” Is Racism in Disguise

  1. James Wyatt Whitehead V

    This is nothing but a Jedi Mind Trick. “These are the droids we are looking for.” This should be called out for exactly what it is.

  2. James Wyatt Whitehead V I’m sorry. I didn’t understand any of those 3 sentences. I can’t tell if you are agreeing with or criticizing the article, and why.

    • James Wyatt Whitehead V

      I thought this was a good article by Mr. Bader. The anti racist ideology just seems like a mind trick to me. It doesn’t make any sense at all. It reminded me of a Star Wars scene.

    • James is correct: “Anti-Racism” Is Racism in Disguise.

      Should “Anti-Racism” become politically successful in America it will reestablish the most racist society in America since before Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863. Indeed, we likely have arrived at that point today.

      “Systemic Racism today” is also myth of worst sort. It is hateful bunkum being used to intimidate and indoctrinate and thus seize illegitimate and dominate political power, control and other peoples’ money, all done via force and elaborate con games.

      • “Should “Anti-Racism” become politically successful in America…..” What, have you been asleep for a few years? Done and done.

        • Well perhaps when you have a lot of white folks just denying that it exists at all – there might be pushback ?

          Over time – this will get sorted out and the extremes on both sides recognized for what they are – but we got here by a lot of denial to start with.

          I point out again – that this kind of thing – is actually fairly rampant in the world in a lot of other countries – decades of systemic racism of one group against others.

          We have pretended we were not one of those countries – and too many of us continue to deny it when it’s overwhelmingly obvious to most.

        • “Should “Anti-Racism” become politically successful in America…..” What, have you been asleep for a few years? Done and done.”

          Excellent point, but admitting defeat is premature, given that vast majority of Americans have been asleep at their post for decades, oblivious to what is happening in higher education and on the streets. But I have not. Just check out my posts and comments here over past decade.

          This too is relevant to what is happening now in America, these feeling of oppression and despair by reason of an emerging totalitarian state, culture, and society in WSJ:

          “For years, I’ve been on the email list of Spike Wilner, the owner-founder of two jewel-like jazz clubs in New York’s Greenwich Village—Small’s and Mezzrow. Mr. Wilner’s weekly paeans to jazz and the people who play it are always a good, diverting read. This week’s email was different. Here is a chunk of it, because he’s got the city exactly right: “It’s hard to describe but the feeling is gone, the vibe absent. The thing that made New York, New York is missing. What’s it like now?

          “It’s very tense. People are very anxious and angry. Everything is closed or, if open, listless. There is no nightlife. If you leave your apartment after 9 p.m. it’s a complete ghost town inhabited by wraiths and zombies, dangerous people. . . . In certain parts of town you have a mob of folks partying outside, like a street fair. Other folks keep their masks tightly on and live in fear. The only place I’ve found some civility and warmth is the city playgrounds where I take my daughter each day. The children are oblivious to the pandemic and just play and climb.”

          See Progressives to Cities, Drop Dead, by Daniel Henninger

          We must take our nation back from these demagogue leftists.

  3. Ah, dragging out the old “reverse discrimination” chestnut.

    • The Supreme Court says that reverse discrimination exists, and that it is sometimes illegal, and sometimes legal. For examples of illegal reverse discrimination, see Gratz v. Bollinger (2003) and Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. (1989). For examples of legal reverse discrimination, see United Steelworkers v. Weber (1979) and Grutter v. Bollinger (2003).

      So reverse discrimination is not a “chestnut.”

  4. I think this is the “chart” Bader is referencing but cannot find where in his links what he says: ” “Rationality” and “hard work” are vestiges of racism, declared the “anti-racism” web site of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington, D.C. It claimed that virtues like “hard work,” “self-reliance,” being “polite,” and being on time are all a product of the “white dominant culture.” So, too, are normal grammar, the scientific method, and its emphasis on “objective, rational linear thinking,” according to a chart the Smithsonian posted.


    • Then perhaps he was referring to something else? You can’t intentionally find something that doesn’t match his narrative and use that imply he made it up. Well, YOU can and often do. He linked to the Real Clear Policy report he based it on….dispute that, if you wish.

      • no – I have made an honest effort to find it – and if someone else can – then I thank them.

        Re: ” make things up”… yep… happens here… seen it…

    • You can’t find it [any more] because sometime in the last few days they removed a link from the chart which directed you to this pdf file:


      • Thanks for the chart – yes… interesting…

        this chart is from a school – no?

        where was the link at originally?

        • The link was originally on the Smithsonian website and was with/near the chart you posted. It was one of many links at that page – most of which are still extant.

          Last Thursday or Friday afternoon (sorry, can’t remember which) I heard a report on a radio talk show that CNN & the Smithsonian website were promoting the idea that “virtues like “hard work,” “self-reliance,” being “polite,” and being on time are all a product of the “white dominant culture.””

          Not being one who trusts radio talk shows for his news, I visited the Smithsonian site and the link was there at that time. It is not there now.

          You may, as you usually do, denounce the source as “biased” or “unreliable”, but here is an article from Monday which mentions the deletion of the link to the chart:


          • Nancy_Naive

            Amazing how fast the Right can self-censor the Left, and how hard is the converse.

          • interesting again… so how did you or real clear politics know about the removal and not Bader?

            other links goes to American Conservative…

            re: ” You may, as you usually do, denounce the source as “biased” or “unreliable”,

            so do you consider these websites as objective and unbiased?

          • Nancy…

            Your statement makes no sense. By definition, one group cannot “self-censor” another group.

          • Nancy_Naive

            “Amazing how fast the Right CAN GET the Left to self-censor, and how hard is the converse.

          • Where on the Smithsonian Website was this link?

            how do we know it was actually there and not just claimed
            so by American Conservative?

            some funny stuff going on here…

            It someone at Smithsonian is posting and removing stuff not approved by the Smithsonian – they have a problem –

            but I still want to be convinced where the link was on their website and what Real Clear Politics and American Conservative involvement are….

          • NN-

            Better. Still wrong, but better.


        • PS – The link to the chart takes you to some school web-site but the chart was prepared by “The Kaleel Jamison Consulting Group”, whatever that is.

          • oh oh – looks like a white liberal group:

          • Larry-

            What’s your point? You asked where the chart came from and I told you.

            I love how you’ll jump right in and pile on when some left-leaning group makes a claim, however specious, but you’re “still want to be convinced” the Smithsonian had, and then removed, a link to a racist document, despite numerous reports of its existence by people who saw it and clicked on it.

            Since in your mind “the Smithsonian website has no such link, and the Smithsonian website has never had such a link”, you are also ready to believe “Oceania is at war with Eastasia. Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.”

            The link was there, your memory hole notwithstanding. Get over it.

          • Can someone check the Wayback machine? Perhaps the page has been preserved there.

          • What’s the Wayback machine?

            Apart from the Peabody & Sherman cartoon, of course – I know about that one.

          • Wayne – it matters where the link came from and at this point do we know if it really existed on the Smithsonian website?

            If it did then Smithsonian has a problem controlling their content.

            Do I trust sites like American Conservative and Bader to be objective unbiased sites who would not play games ?


            lets get to the bottom of who did what here before we decide who was right or wrong and who we want to side with.

          • Larry, See cjbova’s comment (below) posted at 12:16 pm.

          • got it. Thanks Wayne and Carol… looks like someone got carried away over at the Smithsonian.

            I still don’t think they are “complaining” about white culture per se but rather characterizing it – that ought to lead to further discussion. A lot of the points about white culture, to me, seem like attributes for anyone to aspire to… I’d not agree that they are negative aspects of some culture….

      • That’s one of the funniest things I’ve ever read. Talk about stereotyping!

  5. In general – white folks telling black folks that racism is a myth is not a good way to go about resolving the issue…. but it’s relentlessly persistent…

    • I general “white folks” telling “black folks” that they are always victims of racism, no matter what has or has not happened to them and no matter what does or does not happen to them, is not a good way to go about resolving the issue…. but it’s relentlessly persistent…

      • The point is if the two groups do not agree – what do you do about it?

        just continue to assert that it does not exist and continue a race war?

        • I don’t know, perhaps try to stake out some middle-ground, somewhere between the people who claim there is no racism at all anymore and those who try to make EVERYTHING an issue of race?

          • It’s hard to get there when some just deny it all including the history of it.

            For me – I MUST listen to black folks views of it. I cannot put any faith in white folks who tells blacks they are wrong about racism. If you start off rejecting the others complaints – you’re done.

      • well you can deny history in that conversation, and we often do…we just pretend it never happened… not in the school textbooks… what’s the problem?

    • Race itself is a myth. It has no biological basis. After this many thousands of years of human reproduction, people do genetic analysis and find out that the geographic mixing bowl is their own genes. But culture is a very real thing, and there is a long tradition of thinking your culture superior to others. It is a nasty aspect of our human reality, and I’ve always been one to embrace the differences and disdained those who couldn’t. Recently watched a documentary on Jewish comedy in American entertainment, but it was really about Jewish culture, as it existed mostly in the New York area and other big cities. Anti-Semitism sure exists still. Is that racial or cultural? I vote cultural.

      But the false narrative of “race” is deeply ingrained now, politically very useful, and yes racism (in all directions) is deep in some people. Once it was embedded in the law and the economy, less so now but the vestiges and long term damage done remain.

      • “black” in this country has a lot of meaning to a lot of folks – they’re even identified by a range of racist pejoratives starting with the “N” word.

        Generations of people did identify this way.

      • “Race itself is a myth. It has no biological basis. ”

        Uh yep, especially when a avid racist finds himself in the need of a medical transplant.

      • Steve’s comment is probably the most reasonable one I have seen in a long time.

      • “Once it was embedded in the law and the economy, less so now but the vestiges and long-term damage done remain.”

        Yes, and those vestiges are what need to be excised from our laws and our government. Some of us, though, would prefer that it be accomplished without “killing the patient”, so to speak. The playing field is still not completely level, but it is a heck of a lot less skewed than it has ever been, and It should not be overturned with the pieces scattered, or tilted 90 degrees in some other direction, just because some radicals on both sides of the political spectrum can’t agree on exactly how level/tilted it is right now.

        Removing those last bits of skew and achieving real equal opportunity for all may be uncomfortable for some/many, but it needs to be done. I think it can be done without completely redefining our culture and without leaving anyone behind (except for those whose rampant radicalism demands that we reject their views).

        As far as the long-term damage, that will be up to society to repair – not the government created by society but society itself – the people who are out there living their lives every day and don’t have the time or resources to be outraged 24/7 but who recognize that we can behave better than we currently are. This is the place where MLK’s vision truly needs to take root and grow – and where “The Golden Rule” will come in handy.

        Can we improve? Certainly. Will it ever be perfect? Nope – after all, human beings are involved and human beings are by and large very selfish creatures who do selfish things.

        • I’m responding to this only to let you know I read it and I think you have a good heart and are truly genuine in wanting to find a path.

          not everyone is…

      • If we feel that we can’t assert that one culture is superior to any other culture, certainly we can agree that most societies have a dominant culture. Some “minority cultures” in a particular society are compatible enough with the dominant culture that those who adopt them have reasonable prospects for “successful” lives. Other “minority”cultures which are radically incompatible with the dominant culture will find that their adherents have radically reduced opportunities for success in that society. If I were to insist on fully living out the southern, redneck, Protestant “culture” of my ancestors in Saudi Arabia, I would not be a success. Rather, I would likely be dead in a short period of time.

        • re: ” If we feel that we can’t assert that one culture is superior to any other culture, certainly we can agree that most societies have a dominant culture. ”

          We can.

          what does that mean in terms of what we’d do or not about it especially if one side thinks they’ve been under the boot?

          • Larry,
            I only wanted to point out that cultures (regardless of the racial identities of those who adopt them) that are reasonably compatible with the dominant culture tend to foster greater success in a given society. There is a dominant culture in the US (with admitted variants) which can be loosely described as Western Civilization. Those who are part of cultures that are radically incompatible tend to have lower levels of success. If a “side” thinks they have been “under the boot”, they have choices: adapt to the dominant culture and reap benefits, refuse to adapt to the dominant culture and have reduced levels of success, attempt to change the dominant culture through peaceful engagement or violent rebellion. Each has consequences. Perhaps unfortunately, there is no constitutionally defined right to have one’s feelings protected.

          • re: ” Those who are part of cultures that are radically incompatible tend to have lower levels of success.”

            umm… I dunno about that statement … how did they get radical?

            did they feel they’d never get equality?

          • Larry,

            re: ” Those who are part of cultures that are radically incompatible tend to have lower levels of success.”

            umm… I dunno about that statement … how did they get radical?

            did they feel they’d never get equality?”

            It seems that my leftist friends tend to not recognize that words could have multiple meanings and don’t like to read in context. I did not use the word “radically” in a political sense, rather as a simile to “fundamentally”.

  6. James Wyatt Whitehead V

    I just finished reading a biography on Woody Guthrie by Joe Klein. One aspect of the book that caught my attention was how many songs Woody wrote about a post racial America. They are very hopeful songs with Depression Era wisdom sprinkled on top. I never knew that Woody was named Woodrow Wilson Guthrie.

    • Maybe that’s what inspired him… trying to live down his name.

      • Heard some lefty moron on the boob tube claim Trump was our first racist president. As a graduate of Woody Woodrow Jr. Hi. in Roanoke my mind immediately went to the famed Princetonian….

        • I was thinking the same thing when I heard the same guy.

          Now, to be fair, Trump is far more vocal about it than anyone in the last 150 years.

          • That’s silly. Of course, in our lifetime the racism was all being spouted by Southern Democrats so perhaps you’ve conveniently forgotten. Nixon, to his discredit, welcomed them in and played fellow traveler.

          • Well, it would have been Nixon and his Southern Strategy, but Trump is faaaarrrr more open than Nixon. Reagan came closer with his “Welare Queen” stories.
            But, Trump’s challenge of Obama’s birthplace was beyond either Nixon or Reagan, and just drools out daily… Mexican Judge, anyone?

            And, I think the boob’s key point was “actually elected”, so Wallace don’t count.

  7. BR Unmasked? Maybe it applies to schools, beaches, racism, … defiance in general? Stretch to fit? No stretch needed.


    • Their research shows that people with certain antagonistic personality traits may behave antagonistically.

      I wonder if Captain Obvious knows about these startling findings…

      And, of course, since we know that “all tigers are cats but not all cats are tigers”, your “no stretch needed” conclusion is completely without scientific or psychological basis.

  8. A few minutes ago, and for the third or fourth time in the last week, I have been in the middle of replying to someone’s comment and had the comment disappear while I was typing.

    Some of you out there must be just as bad as I am about diving right in to post an insightful and erudite response to someone else’s crude attempt at logic, without reading the entire thread.

    God Bless the delete feature.


    • Delete? Oh, I see. Yeah, but your second thought is only good if had quickly.

      I have found the edit feature nice. For some reason it takes way longer to post the comment initially than to post an edit.

  9. re: ” Some of you out there must be just as bad as I am about diving right in to post an insightful and erudite response to someone else’s crude attempt at logic, without reading the entire thread.”


  10. Racism is absolutely a concern in American society; it may even be our central national trauma. But if we’re to center the lived experiences of Black and Brown Americans as we work through said trauma, we should consider longitudinal data like this. How has perceived racism changed relative to that which we can pretty well quantify?


    The visibility of Police-on-Black killings (as proxy for recognizance of racism) has zero correlation with the rates of such deaths. The timeframes don’t line up exactly, but there’s obviously another dynamic at play.

    Note also how Black perceptions of a racist society track with white perceptions.

    It’s honestly wild how powerful media framing can be in the age of Twitter.

    • “It’s honestly wild how powerful media framing can be in the age of Twitter.”

      That is a very powerful and frightening truth. In the Tweeter Age, the power of bad actors to near instantly create and weaponize myths is horrifying. It’s driving today’s hysteria that is akin to the Salem Witch Trials with the Puritans burning witches on stakes by the dozens monthly.

      It all started with Teddy Kennedy and Joe Biden at Justice Thomas’s “high tech lynching” in the US Senate 3o years ago. Tweeter and its ilk put this wickedness on steroids, driven by the usual suspects.

  11. Also in the context of current politics, Dems want to vilify Repubs as racists, and Dems want to support any group who feels they are prejudiced against (to get the votes), and on the other hand, Trump is trying to accumulate enough vilified outcast Americans (long list, with law enforcement the latest added on to the list). To me vilification is probably a hate, which is similar to racism except directed to non-racial groups.

    • The only thing Trump is accumulating are people with poor political instincts — speaking in terms both the voter base and the staffers. The former, by and large, just don’t know where to turn, but can’t conscience non-engagement with national politics, so they sigh and punch straight-ticket GOP. If Tucker keeps his Fox spot then this could change in a major way, but right now white conservatives just seem lost and afraid to me — not motivated by racial animus.

      Those of our professional political class who aren’t 1) rabid ideologues and 2) visible by virtue of incumbency have all silently agreed that America is having a collective Senior Moment, and are recusing themselves en masse. If they speak out (and such speech is almost invariably along leftward vectors), it’s because they feel personally threatened by what could be done to them if they don’t.

      Unless you are really, really banking on there being a spot for you in Trump 2.0 or a sclerotic Biden Administration wracked by activist-donor tensions, there’s zero reason to put your career on the line for the sake of the national conversation around race.

    • well no, not all GOP – there are some GOP that are principled and not racists but unfortunately we got some of the others also.

      I have no problem what-so-ever with Romney or John Kasich or a number of others of that mindset.

      The far right, white supremacists and evangelicals have a death grip on the Republican party these days… IMHO.

      • Glad your opinion is humble. How do you know that Romney and Kasich are not white supremacists? They certainly are not evangelicals. BTW, are you bigoted toward evangelicals? If so, what is it about them that you so despise? At social gatherings, do you repeat the phrase “I have evangelical friends”, so as to hide your bigotry?

  12. James Wyatt Whitehead V

    Don’t forget that Nixon was the one who forced remaining de jure segregated schools in the south to cave in starting in 1969. Total compliance by 1973.

  13. Larry asked:… so how did you or real clear politics know about the removal

    Maybe because the Smithsonian said they did?

    At the National Museum of African American History and Culture, we believe that any productive conversation on race must start with honesty, respect for others, and an openness to ideas and information that provide new perspectives.

    In that context, we recently unveiled “Talking About Race,” an online portal providing research, studies, and other academic materials from the fields of history, education, psychology, and human development. Our goal in doing so was to contribute to a discussion on this vitally important subject that millions of Americans are grappling with.

    Since yesterday, certain content in the “Talking About Race” portal has been the subject of questions that we have taken seriously. We have listened to public sentiment and have removed a chart that does not contribute to the productive discussion we had intended.

  14. Apparently something along these lines WAS posted on the Smithsonian website.

    I’m not sure it was a “complaint” as much as it was a statement intending as a starting point for dialogue:

    • The Jewish comics I was watching would have had some fun with that. Shelly Berman, Lenny Bruce, Shecky Greene, Henny Youngman.

    • Starting points for politically-charged dialogue are quite often, well, politically charged, and the Smithsonian example isn’t any different. It assumes from the outset that the findings of Critical Theory — not at all known or accepted by broad portions of the American public — are self-evident. Declaring your foundational worldview as an effective and objective basis for further discussion obviously tilts said discussion in favor of you. This is a pretty common (and transparent) tool of rhetoric.

      Curiously (and totally separate from the above discussion), the NMAAHC stuff was authored by Judith Katz, who’s made a name for herself as a corporate diversity consultant over the past few decades. If you look at some of the other screenshots, you’ll see a kinda weird fixation on “white” attitudes toward career achievement, the Protestant work ethic, etc.

      Corporations leveraging Critical Theory to defang labor rights and the agency of workers is hilariously frightening, but it’s a real thing.

    • Larry, I’m done with trying to talk with you.
      It wasn’t “apparently” posted, it was posted.

      You said, “Wayne – it matters where the link came from and at this point do we know if it really existed on the Smithsonian website?” You challenged the others who said it was there, I give you the quote from the Smithsonian saying the chart had been there and they took it down.

      You then try to recharacterize the question from whether a chart was on the Smithsonian site to something about why it was there. I will not read your comments from now on or answer any questions you pose.

      • Carol – did you see the date on the Smithsonian apology relative to the dates on Bader and American Conservative posts and neither Bader nor American Conservative noted the apology that accompanied removal of the link – which they seem to be implying was quietly removed without notice?

    • It was not “something along those lines”, Larry. It was the exact chart to which I posted a link here earlier today.

      Why can’t you just admit it?

      • I admit it. Something is wrong at the Smithsonian to allow that to be posted under the name.

        This kind of thing is wrong and deserves the criticism it is receiving.

        good enough?

      • Wayne – did you see the date on the Smithsonian apology letter relative to the Bader and American conservative posts?

  15. The pendulum swings is apropos, and you’re already worried about the left extremis.

    That’s what makes youse guys so damned funny.

    It’s been 400 years of open racism and we’ve yet to reach the center point. Given pendulum periods, y’all will be rotting corpses before it gets anywhere near the point you fear.

    • Recent research is now positing human occupation of the North and South American continents back 20,000 years, pushing the date further back. So, 400 years? As soon as there were two tribes in two valleys, the cultural biases (and probably the practice of slavery) began. Lovely folks, the Aztecs, if you happened to be one of their enemies….

  16. James Wyatt Whitehead V

    I have a Nixon Now More Than Ever bumper sticker on the back of my 1970 VW Bus. The passenger seating has 6 life sized Smurfs. So I can never get out of a shopping center parking lot. I always end up talking to people about either Nixon, the Smurfs, or a long winded “I once had a VW” story.

  17. Nancy talks about he pendulum.

    It’s that way. To this point – we had not that many that would admit racism much less willing to deal with it.

    Now that we have seen change – it’s gone too far.

    It’s does not mean we go back to square on – and some on the right will never be happy no matter what unless we roll it back to square one.

  18. Haner. You watch a documentary about “Jewish” humor and are suddenly an expert? I’d watch it if I were you. Your @values” are showing which might be great for Richmond but won’t cut it elsewhere.

  19. Haner. Now you are insulting Aztecs. Please seek therapy

Leave a Reply