[Editor’s note: Below is a passage excerpted from David’s recent book The Radical Mind, published by Humanix Books. Order it HERE. David’s new book America Betrayed will be published by Skyhorse this spring.]
On December 26, 1969, in Flint Michigan, roughly 300 college students – almost exclusively white – gathered in a run-down dance hall called the Giant Ballroom. The ballroom was located in the heart of one of Flint’s black neighborhoods, and also one of its most violent. A bullet hole in the front door marked the spot where, the night before, a disgruntled patron had fired a shotgun into the hall inadvertently killing a black customer who was there to celebrate Christmas, and was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
The attendees were members or alumni of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), the largest radical movement on university campuses during the 1960s. They had come to attend the last “National Council” meeting of SDS.
The organization’s recently elected leaders, who called themselves the “Weathermen” were billing the event as a “National War Council.” The name was not rhetorical. Their intention was to transform SDS into an underground terrorist army whose mission was to be an “enemy within,” taking up arms against America, in behalf of the non-white peoples of the world whom America allegedly oppressed. They intended to play a key role in the struggle to defeat the global empire of U.S. imperialism, and replace it with a communist state.
Columbia graduate, Mark Rudd, the National Secretary of SDS, described the venue of the gathering in his memoir Underground: My Life With SDS and the Weathermen. “The Detroit collective had decorated the ballroom unlike any other dance hall I’d ever seen. A six-foot cardboard machine gun suspended over the stage set the tone, as did psychedelic portraits of our heroes Fidel, Che, Ho Chi Minh, Lenin, Mao, Malcolm X, and Eldridge Cleaver of the Black Panthers.” Cleaver had earned his spot by breaking with the Panther leadership over his call for a shooting war against America starting immediately.
The evening’s speeches began with Weatherman’s queen bee, Bernardine Dohrn issuing a signature call to arms. Dohrn mounted the platform wearing a brown mini-jumpsuit and thigh-high Italian leather boots causing a stir among the tie-dyed, blue jeaned Weather army sitting at her feet. Referring to the date on which the Weathermen had staged a three-day riot in Chicago billed as the “Days of Rage” specifically targeting police, she said “Since October 11th we’ve been wimpy….
“A lot of us,” she went on, “are still honkies [radicals’ derogatory term for whites] and we’re scared of fighting. We have to get into armed struggle.” Dohrn then began to talk about the demented killer Charlie Manson and what she referred to as the “Tate Eight” – a reference to the pregnant actress Sharon Tate, brutally murdered along with seven others, by the Manson gang who, to emphasize their contempt, stabbed her sixteen times, stuck a fork in her pregnant belly and scrawled “Pig” on the front door of the house they were in. The deranged Manson had planned the attack, hoping to join a race war by blacks against whites.
“Dig it!” bellowed Dohrn. “First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, they even shoved a fork into a victim’s stomach! Wild!” Then she held up three fingers in a “fork salute,” which immediately caught on with the crowd.
Dohrn was followed to the stage by John Jacobs, known as “J.J.,” a charismatic inspirer of violence and hatred directed against white “Amerikkka,” as the Weathermen preferred to spell the name of their country. “We’re against everything that’s good and decent in honky Amerikkka,” he ranted. “We will loot, and burn, and destroy. We are the incubation of your mother’s nightmares.”
They sounded eerily like Dostoevsky’s Russian revolutionaries as he portrayed them in The Devils (also translated as The Possessed): “We shall proclaim destruction—why? why – well because the idea is so fascinating! But – we must get a little exercise. We’ll have a few fires – we’ll spread a few legends… And the whole earth will resound with the cry: ‘A new and righteous law is coming.’”
Next up was Rudd who joined the nihilistic frenzy ginned up by J.J. and Dohrn. Rudd’s later reflection on what he said, recorded in his memoir Underground, is revealing: “My own madness—possibly to keep up with that of my comrades—slipped out of my mouth as I paced the floor back and forth in front of the assembled troops. ‘We have to be like Captain Ahab, we have to become monomaniacal and take the harpoon of righteousness and kill the white whale of imperialism.’”
Rudd apparently forgot that the white whale was triumphant in Moby Dick. Then he added: “It’s a wonderful feeling to hit a pig. It must be a really wonderful feeling to kill a pig or blow up a building.”  In recalling the speech years later, Rudd was mystified at how he could have said what he said. “Where did these words come from?” Rudd asked as though he was not their author.
He answered the question this way: “Posturing alone doesn’t tell the story. They came from my righteous anger—and my grief—over what our country was doing in Vietnam and what the police were doing here at home.” Rudd was a man clinging desperately to his receding humanity, succumbing to the pressure to conform to the “madness” of the moment, but then seeking to justify it.
In fact, Rudd remained permanently uneasy with the criminal, even inhuman hatred displayed by his comrades. Dohrn’s speech particularly shook him as he linked it to the extreme anti-white racism of his comrades: “There were crazy discussions at Flint over whether killing white babies was inherently revolutionary, since all white people are the enemy. Out of this bizarre thinking came Bernardine’s infamous speech praising Charles Manson and his gang’s murder of actress Sharon Tate [and her friends]. The message was that we shit on all your conventional values, you murderers of black revolutionaries and Vietnamese babies. There were no limits now to our politics of transgression.”
Though he recognized the “madness” he had become party to, Rudd never gave up the sanctimony of self-justification – the “righteousness” of what he thought he was doing. For revolutionaries, the end always justifieds the means.
Outside the ideological bubble of the left, however, the Vietnamese Communists were ruthless aggressors who hardly represented the Vietnamese people as a whole, while the Panthers, despite their rhetoric, had little support in the black community because they were a criminal street gang responsible for the murder of a dozen blacks and several police officers, as well as arson, extortion and rape, all of which had put them on the FBI’s Most Wanted List.
While Rudd never left the bubble, the doubts he was experiencing proved to be paralyzing. Because of them, he was only months away from being pushed out of the leadership of Weatherman (the collective name of their army), and then out of the party itself.
Rudd’s dilemma highlighted the problem that had led to the creation of “Weatherman” in the first place. It explains why the National War Council of 1969 and its aftermath are so remote from the massive violent attacks that became a feature of the nation’s landscape half a century later, when hundreds of American cities were attacked by Black Lives Matter radicals, and torched in the wake of George Floyd’s death. Scores and eventually thousands were killed and $7 billion worth of property was either damaged or destroyed.
Even though the 1960s collegiate left condemned American policies in Vietnam and what they believed was America’s treatment of blacks at home, and contemplated killing white babies, the fact was that white middle class students were generally not criminals and did not yet have the stomach for the savage violence that Black Lives Matter unleashed and that revolutionary war demanded.
The problem facing the militant Weathermen was dramatized in the poor attendance at the War Council itself. The previous June, the National Council meeting had attracted 1500 attendees, or about five times the number that showed up for the December event. The decline in support for the new militance of the organization was evidenced in the months leading up to the council. “Earlier that fall” Rudd noted, “an avalanche of chapters had disassociated themselves from the National Office. Others had folded up, their members demoralized by the factional fighting and violence of the past year.”
To explain this drop-off, Rudd singled out the “Days of Rage,” the three-day riot the Weatherman leaders of SDS had staged in Chicago, which they hoped would be a test of their activists’ willingness to provoke an actual combat with police, and had hyped as an event that would deliver a death blow to U.S. imperialism. Instead, Rudd lamented, the event had “killed SDS.”
The Weatherman militants had hoped to attract thousands to the battle in Chicago. But only hundreds showed up willing to risk their lives and take others. Unlike the anti-police rioters fifty years later, who attracted millions to support them, inspired criminal violence that lasted for months and produced a general crime wave in its wake, the revolutionaries of the Sixties were too middle class, too civilized and moral to come anywhere close to matching the destructive achievements of Black Lives Matter and its followers.
Nonetheless, the core of would-be terrorists who attended the Flint War Council did go underground, concealing their comings and goings with safe houses provided by their families and supporters, forging fake identities and disappearing into the urban wilderness, only to surface in acts of violence against police stations and policemen, and symbolic buildings like the U.S. Capitol and the Pentagon. A new leader named Billy Ayers -paramour of Bernardine Dohrn and future confidant of Barack Obama – emerged in the Underground and later wrote a memoir, Fugitive Days, in which he described their joy in violence: “Everything was absolutely ideal on the day I bombed the Pentagon. The sky was blue. The birds were singing. And the bastards were finally going to get what was coming to them.”
There were several thousand bombings in the next few years, many but not all perpetrated by the Weather Underground (as they now described themselves). Fortunately, most of the bombings (but not all) targeted empty buildings, avoiding human casualties. Even the Weather Underground hit a wall when it came to the cold blooded but “righteous” murders they fantasized.
On March 6th, just over two months after the War Council, there had been an explosion in a New York townhouse that leveled the building killing three Weatherman leaders, including 23-year-old Terry Robbins, one of the most violent members of the group. The explosion was the result of three “anti-personnel” bombs they were building – dynamite packed with nails – to detonate at a dance scheduled to be held at Fort Dix for recruits and their dates. The entire Weather leadership, including Ayers, Dohrn, J.J. and Rudd, were aware of the plan and had approved it.
Rudd talked to Robbins a few nights before the explosion. “Terry had told me what his group was planning. ‘We’re going to kill the pigs at a dance at Fort Dix,’ he said.” But their incompetence prevented them from carrying out the plan. After the bomb exploded prematurely, killing three of the bomb-makers who were lovers and friends – the Weather Underground pulled back from the extremes towards which they were pressing, and confined most of their actions to empty buildings.
The event also precipitated Rudd’s exit from the group. Eventually, he wound up a fugitive hiding in Santa Fe, New Mexico, working as a teacher and eventually writing his memoir. In it, he remembered the months preceding the fateful War Council. “Terry and J.J., the two East Coast leaders, sure of where we were going, were providing leadership. In our many meetings in New York City, one or the other would rant, ‘White people are pigs. This whole society has to be brought down. We have got to defeat white skin privilege; we can’t let the Panthers and the Vietnamese bear all the costs.’”
“White skin privilege,” the self-justifying term that crystalized their hatred for “Amerikkka,” had been picked up by Weatherman and promoted within SDS during the year of the War Council. The term was coined by an auto-didact and political communist named Theodore Allen, who had written a book called The Invention of the White Race, and a Harvard lecturer named Noel Ignatiev. It was popularized by a group of radical Harvard academics that included Ignatiev and also Cornel West, a shallow ideologue and Harvard professor known for his theatrics, which had made him famous throughout the academic world. The Harvard radicals were grouped around a magazine called Race Traitor, which bore the motto: “Treason to the White Race is Loyalty to Humanity.” 
Six months before the National War Council in Flint, The New York Times reported that the National Office of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) was calling “for an all-out fight against ‘white skin privileges.’”
The other indispensable combat term, “pigs,” to describe police and military personnel, and then by extension any adversary perceived to be defending “U.S. imperialism,” was inspired by the Black Panther slogan “Off the pigs!” – a direct incitement to murder cops.
A Weatherman manifesto explained: “…Pigs really are the issue and people will understand this, one way or another. They can have a liberal understanding that pigs are sweaty working-class barbarians who over-react and commit ‘police brutality’ and so shouldn’t be on campus. Or they can understand pigs as the repressive imperialist State doing its job. Our job is … to emphasize that they are our real enemy if we fight that struggle to win. A revolution is a war; when the Movement in this country can defend itself militarily against total repression it will be part of the revolutionary war.”
The indispensable nature of the two derogatory terms to the revolutionary cause is obvious. You can’t eliminate an enemy that you don’t first demonize and hate. “White skin privilege” and “pigs” are racist poisons intended to dehumanize the enemy, erasing him in advance of the actual death blow. The intended result is that there be no counter-productive, paralyzing, guilt. The history of Weatherman shows that even if one is determined enough to dehumanize the enemy, the flesh and blood reality of murder makes delivering the actual death blow for people who are not naturally psycopaths or criminals, difficult.
Anti-White Racism Spreads Through the Culture
As isolated as Weatherman and the Panthers were at the time, they were still able to seed the culture and make these poisonous terms a currency in the political left. It took fifty years to grow them into a rhetoric that would permeate the culture itself – that would find currency in the White House and the ruling political party, and among the nation’s intellectual elite led by the New York Times, underwriting an indictment of Amerikkka as a “white supremacist,” “systemically racist nation,” whose oppressor class is defined by its skin color.
These libels justified to millions of supporters, the Black Lives Matter criminal riots, lootings and arsons that followed the death in police custody of a delirious, high on fentanyl, career criminal who had resisted arrest. They also rationalized the coverup – from the White House down – of the greatest eruption of civic violence in American history as a “social justice” movement that was primarily “peaceful.”
There is in fact no systemic racism in America that would justify the months of arsons, lootings and shootings, and “De-Fund the Police” actions demanded by Black Lives Matter’s criminal leaders. If there were “systemic racism” touching “every facet of American life” as Joe Biden proclaimed during his first week as president, the Department of Justice would be launching massive prosecutions of police departments and other institutions for violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which explicitly outlaws systemic racism. There are no such prosecutions – not even in one of the eighteen thousand local police departments in this country – because there is no systemic racism in America.
There is, however, one exception: affirmative action programs in education. These received a specific exemption from the Supreme Court, which promised back in 1978 that they would be temporary. But instead of being temporary this official discrimination not only became a permanent feature of American life but forty years later was escalated as Biden’s “equity” policy – into a massive unconstitutional redistribution of wealth on the basis of skin color.
The vehicle for spreading the poisons that underwrote both the mayhem of 2020 and the anti-white racism that has metastasized like a cancer into the mainstream culture is an educational system subverted and corrupted by anti-American radicals. In the 1970s many of them were pursuing graduate careers in order to avoid the draft. Even so, the transformation did not happen by accident. In that decade, the most popular intellectual figure among leftwing academics was a deceased Italian Communist named Antonio Gramsci. Gramsci wrestled with a problem that had burdened leftists since the First World War: Why had the Marxist proletariat failed to make a revolution? Gramsci not only came up with an answer, he proposed a solution.
According to Gramsci, the answer could be found in the fact that the capitalist ruling class exerts a cultural hegemony over society, which allows it to dominate its culturally diverse population. Through its hegemony, it is able to manipulate the culture of society as a whole – its ideas, beliefs, perceptions, and values, so that the worldview of the ruling class becomes the accepted cultural norm. The industrial proletariat is unable to overcome this disadvantage. Therefore, the revolutionary vanguard must be drawn not from the proletariat but from the intellectuals who deal in ideas, beliefs, perceptions, and values.
Instead of taking over the means of industrial production as the fulcrum for transforming society, as Marx had advised, under Gramsci’s plan the revolution would instead be advanced by taking over the means of cultural production – the universities, churches, philanthropic institutions and media. Having achieved that goal, the radical vanguard would be able to manipulate the ideas, beliefs, perceptions and values of the population as a whole to support its revolutionary goals.
Over the next 50 years, this set of ideas shaped a movement, which succeeded in manipulating the cultural and political institutions that shape the nation’s worldview in behalf of its goal of achieving what Barack Obama called the “fundamental” transformation of the United States of America. Its center was a quiet revolution in the halls of academe. By the turn of the century there were hundreds of “Whiteness Studies” courses in universities across the country, taking their place alongside the ethnic and gender “studies” programs that had been launched at the end of the Sixties. All these other ethnic- and gender-oriented academic fields celebrated their subjects after framing them as victims of white and male oppression. “Whiteness Studies” was the exception. The hundreds of programs were universally devoted to the proposition that “whiteness” was evil and needed to be “abolished.”
The racist perspective of the Whiteness Studies field was summarized by Jeff Hitchcock, executive director of the Center for the Study of White American Culture at the “Third National Conference on Whiteness” held in 1998, in these self-abasing terms: “There is no crime that whiteness has not committed against people of color. There is no crime that we have not committed even against ourselves. . . We must blame whiteness for the continuing patterns today that deny the rights of those outside of whiteness and which damage and pervert the humanity of those of us within it.” A Google search today for “abolition of whiteness” yields over one million results.
Mark Rudd never gave up his anti-American animus when he settled in Santa Fe, but he did become a teacher. Bernardine Dohrn became a law professor at Northwestern University. When Billy Ayers retired as an unrepentant terrorist in the 1980s, he became a lecturer and then a very influential professor of education at Columbia Teachers College where he edited a series of educational guides for K-12 schools, whose titles always began with “Teaching Social Justice” and whose tendentious texts often embraced the most unlikely subjects like mathematics, where the pedagogy was to use body counts in Vietnam for simple arithmetic problems.
Kathy Boudin, who was one of two terrorists to escape the Townhouse where she was part of the bomb building team, went on to join other Weather alumni in the “May 19 Communist Organization,” a support group for the Black Liberation Army. In October 1981 they robbed a Brinks truck, killing one guard and two officers, including the first black hired to the Nyack, NY police force, leaving 9 young children without fathers.
Kathy Boudin and David Gilbert were part of the robbery team, and were tried and sentenced to prison. Their son, Chesa, was raised by their comrades-in-arms, the unrepentant terrorists, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. Chesa eventually became one of the radical prosecutors funded by George Soros to dismantle the criminal justice system. His pro-criminal policies quickly led to a record crime wave in San Francisco.
Chesa’s father, David Gilbert, was eventually released from jail because of his prosecutor son’s efforts. His mother Kathy, who had been tried and sentenced to twenty years in prison, was paroled early after years of effort by progressives, and in particular by The New York Times, which falsely portrayed her as a reformed and repentant inmate. On her release she was hired to head a program at the Columbia School of Social Work, where her faculty was entirely composed, in accordance with her wishes, of convicted felons.
The most important aspect of these episodes – and there were many others like them – is the welcome these criminals received from the radicalized faculties and administrators of the schools to which they flocked. One need look no further than the “bias” in the media, the courts, the philanthropic foundations and the Democrat Party apparatus to understand how fashionable and sympathetic a terrorist history and anti-American mentality had become in a university system that fed these same institutions and had effectively purged its conservative voices.
A study conducted in 2020 of more than 12,000 college professors from 31 states, showed that professor donations to Democrats out-numbered those to Republicans by a ratio of 95-1. This would be a complete absurdity in a legitimate educational institution with no censors at the front door. A similar study of academic departments at 66 top-ranked liberal arts colleges and more than 8000 professors showed that there were no Republicans on the faculties, for example, of communications departments in those schools.
Communications departments are the training and credentialing institutions for members of the media. No one should be surprised, then, that the nation’s media are the primary spreaders of the anti-American doctrines and hatreds of the left, including its “white skin privilege,” “white supremacy” and “systemic racism” myths.
Amplifying these troubling statistics, a recent survey of 1200 seniors by the Harvard Crimson revealed that only 7.1% of Harvard’s students identified as conservatives before coming to Harvard. This fact in itself indicates rampant discrimination against conservatives by the Harvard admissions office, since in a population of 330 million, roughly half of whom vote Republican, it is not possible that only 7.1% of admissions to the nation’s premier school should be conservative.
Once in control of the universities, the left leveraged its cultural power by establishing “diversity” programs to indoctrinate the unenlightened into their racial world view. These required staff and eventually led to the formation of an entire and highly lucrative profession of diversity trainers to take their anti-white passions into the world at large.
Across the nation radical re-education camps are now routinely held in businesses, professional offices, medical schools, universities and even kindergartens under the Orwellian flag of “Diversity, Equity and Inclusion.” These are thinly veiled ideological programming sessions whose message is: white people oppress black people, are inevitably racists, and are on “the wrong side of history.” The hapless subjects of these sessions risk loss of face, employment and social standing if they fail to agree with their anti-white instructors.
The unrelenting purpose of these re-education classes is to instruct the “un-woke” in the new orthodoxy in which “white skin privilege” makes the world unequal, and oppresses “people of color” by condemning them to a status absurdly described as “marginal” and “underserved.” The bottom line in these self-criticism exercises is that whites need to own up to their guilt as members of the oppressor race. To deny this “fact” is a manifestation of “white fragility” and proof of guilt. Whites are privileged oppressors, regardless of their personal intentions, beliefs, behaviors or status in life. They stand condemned as elite participants in a system that oppresses “people of color,” because they are not white.
Nor should it be surprising that during the greatest eruption of civic violence in American history, the college-indoctrinated media and the Democrat Party should praise nihilistic riots and lootings as a “social justice” movement, while providing cover for the rioters by insisting their protests were “peaceful.”
Discrimination on the basis of skin color has been outlawed in America for half a century and the equality of all its citizens has been the inspirational goal of the nation since its founding in 1776 and 1787. That is why the words “white,” “black,” “male,” and “female,” do not appear in the Constitution.
Given the aspiration of America’s majority white population – backed by the blood of generations – to create an inclusive egalitarian society, one might reasonably ask, “How is it possible to describe such a uniquely inspirational people as ‘white supremacist’?”
What, then, is white skin privilege? Here’s my politically incorrect answer: White skin privilege is the gift of being the only racial/ethnic group in America which it is permissible – and even admirable – to single out for abuse. Indeed, handing out such abuse is obligatory for all who regard themselves as progressive, and aspire to create a brave new world of “social justice.”
Anti-white racism is a constant theme of the mainstream media, the popular and corporate cultures, and the educational system from kindergarten to graduate school. It is the repetitive message of such racist shapers of public opinion as the anchors and commentators at CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC and CBS, as well as the editorial boards and staffs of The New York Times, and The Washington Post, and their allies in the Democrat Party.
White skin privilege is the privilege of going to the back of the line for a job or promotion, a scholarship or a place in a top-tier university. It is the privilege of being presumed guilty in any controversy or conflict where a “person of color” is involved. In short, it is the privilege of being a second-class citizen, responsible for injustices and crimes both real and imagined, with which said citizen actually has had nothing to do, and of which he may be completely unaware.
White privilege is the privilege of being regarded as untrustworthy, prejudiced, and blind to the injustices one’s whiteness allegedly inflicts on non-whites. White privilege is the privilege of being damned for alleged oppressions like “Stop and Frisk” laws, which are race neutral, and also the often imaginary crimes of one’s often merely alleged ancestors.
Eighty percent or more of today’s American citizens are descended from immigrants whose ancestors came to America after white Americans abolished black slavery, a vile institution which was all but invented in black Africa. But it is a matter of social justice in today’s politically correct culture to seek reparations for slavery from Americans whose ancestors never owned slaves, and were not even in the country at the time, but were oppressed themselves in ethnic and religious ghettos across the globe. Reparations for slavery are also sought from the descendants of the 360,000 mainly white Union soldiers who gave their lives to abolish slavery.
In the ideological worlds of the radical left, facts are as irrelevant as they were to their Ku Klux Klan predecessors. It’s all about skin color deployed as a weapon to advance totalitarian agendas.
White skin privilege is the privilege of being held responsible for slavery when virtually every black slave transported to America was originally enslaved by black Africans; when white America accounted for less than 4% of the African slave trade to the New World; when the global slave trade was mainly run by Muslim “people of color;” when white America and England led the world in abolishing slavery, while people of color in the British empire defended it. And when slavery is an institution that still exists in non-white Africa today.
White skin privilege is the privilege of being scapegoated for every failure of those “people of color” who are unable to take advantage of the opportunities America affords to all races, and in particular to the vast majority of African Americans who have successfully made it into the working, middle and upper classes.
America is now facing a national political crisis over its southern border because of the poverty and oppression caused by the corrupt politics and leftist economies of Central and South America, which have prompted their citizens to break into our country illegally. Conditions in the resource-rich southern hemisphere are so bad that 20 million of its residents have already broken the law to violate our sovereignty, bankrupt our social services and educational systems, and fill our jails.
According to the left, to build a wall to stem this flood is “white racism” – or, as a top Democratic strategist put it recently, “Building a wall says, ‘If you are brown, turn around.’” Such racist logic provides an excuse for Democrats to open our borders to the world’s Islamic terrorists who are also brown, and have killed hundreds of thousands of mainly brown victims since 9/11.
Here is how the website “Learning for Justice,” explains the invisible powers of “white privilege” to its target audience of K-12 teachers: “It seems logical that a person should have the chance to prove themselves individually before they are judged. It’s supposedly an American ideal. But it’s a privilege often not granted to people of color—with dire consequences. For example, programs like New York City’s now-abandoned ‘Stop and Frisk’ policy target a disproportionate number of black and Latinx[sic] people.”
Stop and Frisk was originally a New York law enforcement policy designed to make random checks for concealed weapons, and thus to prevent potential armed robberies and homicides.It was instituted by conservative Republicans and subsequently ended by leftwing Democrats as “racist.” Like all “analyses” offered by progressive racists, the Learning for Justice explanation eliminates specifics like the motivations for the policies, and the details of their applications. It thus obscures from view all the actions of individuals that might account for the disproportionate number of blacks and Hispanics affected, in order to focus on the invisible but sinister oppressor, “white skin privilege.”
In reality, the selective nature of the policy was dictated by the fact that 98% of the homicides in New York City are committed by blacks and Hispanics. Blacks constitute only 23% of the city’s population but they commit nearly 70% of the armed robberies, while whites are responsible for fewer than 5% of the same. In other words, the Stop and Frisk policies that discover “disproportionately” concealed and illegal weapons among blacks and Hispanics have an explanation that is behavioral, not racial. So-called white “privilege” is a myth.
The stubborn fact remains that whites account for a miniscule amount of the homicides and robberies in New York City. Therefore, law enforcement officials are wise to be less interested in them. On the other hand, more than 90% of the homicide victims of blacks and Hispanics are other blacks and Hispanics. So “Stop and Frisk” should really be seen as a privilege for the black and Hispanic communities who are the potential targets of lethal criminal behavior, and therefore favored for protection. Or it was a privilege until the left, led by the radical mayor of New York, ended the practice.
Most examples offered by proponents of the “white skin privilege” scam, depend on attributing all disparities between races to “systemic racism” rather than to the habits, attitudes and actions of individuals. For example, the Learning for Justice article tells us, “the ability to accumulate wealth has long been a white privilege—a privilege created by overt, systemic racism in both the public and private sectors.”
Learning for Justice doesn’t identify any overt racism or racist acts (which are illegal), or examine any of the individual behaviors that lead to wealth accumulation. That white racism denies blacks the opportunity to amass wealth would be news to Oprah Winfrey, daughter of a share cropper, raised in segregated Mississippi, and now the richest woman in America with a net worth of $3.5 billion; or billionaire basketball player and TV host, Shaquille O’Neill; or hip hop mogul, clothing magnate and outsize celebrity Sean “P. Diddy” Combs or ghetto survivor Snoop Dogg or any of the many blacks who have managed to accumulate tens and hundreds of millions of dollars in a single lifetime.
Seventy percent of black children are born out of wedlock thanks in part to a welfare policy inflicted by leftists on America’s poor that cuts off benefits for homes where a father is present. All other factors being equal, including race, a child raised in a single mother household is seven times more likely to be poor, than a child raised in a household with two parents. But facts like this are generally excluded from the “studies” that claim the wealth gap is intractable. “Inherited wealth” is often invoked as an insuperable advantage – a privilege that allegedly whites alone can take advantage of. But 80% of all millionaires are first generation millionaires. In other words, they earned their desserts, and did so in a single generation.
“White skin privilege” is not only itself a racist term, but part of a totalitarian ideology – often referred to as identity politics – which erases the individual in favor of group identities based on race and gender. It warps language to conceal the facts that refute its claims. “White skin privilege” is an Orwellian construct to scapegoat whites who in reality, and in alliance with minorities, have created the most tolerant and inclusive society in human history.
The term “undocumented immigrant” favored by progressives, is another form of Orwellian DoubleSpeak designed by leftists to suppress the fact that millions of aliens have violated the nation’s laws, circumvented its citizenship process and stolen places that belong to those applying for entry legally. It is part of the left’s criminal efforts to eliminate by fiat the very concept of citizenship, along with the obligations it entails, in exchange for the rights and privileges it bestows.
Similarly, the term “under-served communities,” universally used to justify privileges granted on the basis of skin color, suppresses the truth that these privileges are only necessary because the beneficiaries are unable to qualify under the same standards required of others. In other words, to obscure the fact that nobody is under-serving these communities, they are underserving themselves. If there is a lack of stores and services in inner city communities, for example, out of control crime rates and drug abuse are obvious reasons. But decriminalization of crimes and legalization of drugs are progressive causes!
No one in their right mind thinks that the admissions staffs at America’s left-wing colleges are excluding black and brown minorities for racist reasons. Especially not when the same colleges are spending hundreds of millions of dollars to seek out and recruit minorities, while lowering their entrance requirements to benefit them in the process. By ascribing every disadvantage to racism, progressives remove accountability from the so-called “oppressed,” and deny them the incentive to change self-destructive behaviors.
The only reason for the subterfuge “under-served” is to provide a justification for the fact that the applicants are unqualified – for whatever reasons – and in need of special privileges. By using “structural” categories like race to lump the qualified and the unqualified together, progressives create the fiction that minorities as a group are “marginalized” and “excluded” by whites, and incapable of meeting the same standards. What progressives really mean by this conflation is that they regard minorities as inferior and unable to perform up to the standards of others – not only whites, but also Asians and successful blacks.
The reality is indisputably different. Far from being marginalized, blacks are the center of national attention, a dominant force in the popular culture, and the beneficiaries of government provided privileges and support unrivalled by any other ethnic group. The fact remains that eighty percent of blacks are productive citizens securely within the working, middle and even upper classes.
Today’s progressive left – more accurately today’s progressively fascist left – has embraced a racist doctrine in which white people are scapegoats who serve a political purpose similar to the Jews of the Third Reich, though obviously not so defenseless.
In the end, the stigma “white skin privilege” serves the same purpose for contemporary radicals seeking to re-imagine and transform America according to socialist designs as it did for the Weathermen, who embraced and popularized it. If America is a white supremacist nation, and has been since its inception, then by the very values of equality and tolerance that Americans cherish, America and its institutions are not worth respecting or defending. “White skin privilege” is a racist weapon to dismantle and destroy the nation we have known, loved and prospered in.
 Rudd, op. cit. loc. 3078
 Peter Collier and David Horowitz, Destructive Generation, 1989, p. 94
 Op. cit., Frontispiece
 Rudd, op. cit., Underground Kindle edition, loc 3100
 David Horowitz, Radical Son, 1997 Part 5. Burroughs, Days of Rage
 Rudd, Underground, op. cit., Kindle Edition, loc 3176
 Rudd, Underground, op. cit. Kindle Edition, loc. 3149
 The New York Times, June 15, 1969, p. 20;
 Bullock, Alan; Trombley, Stephen, Editors (1999), The New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought Third Edition, pp. 387–88
 John Perazzo, “The Ugly Racism of ‘Whiteness Studies’ Programs,” FrontPageMag.com https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/263671/ugly-racism-whiteness-studies-programs-john-perazzo.
 Thomas Sowell, Conquests and Cultures (New York: Basic Books), 1998, section titled “The Africans: Slavery, pp. 109-112; Dinesh D’Souza, The End of Racism (New York: The Free Press), 1995, pp. 71-74.
 Thomas Sowell, Black Rednecks and White Liberals (San Francisco: Encounter Books, 2005), See Chapter 3: “The Real History of Slavery.”
 https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/yale-study-finds-twice-as-many-undocumented-immigrants-as-previous-estimates; https://www.dailywire.com/news/9-things-you-need-know-about-illegal-immigration-aaron-bandler; https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/illegal-immigrants-responsible-for-almost-three-fourths-of-federal-drug-possession-sentences-in-2014; https://immigration.procon.org/questions/does-illegal-immigration-relate-to-higher-crime-incidence/#quote-1275; https://thehill.com/latino/331619-doj-releases-data-on-incarceration-rates-of-illegal-immigrants; https://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/407312-one-in-five-us-prison-inmates-is-a-criminal-alien