“16 Tons” of Diversity & RacismStephen Paul Foster
“Racism.” “Diversity.” These two words control the way we talk about race in America. That is by design: they are metapolitical words, not words about politics or politicians, rather words that lay down the “no trespassing” moral boundaries of political conversation. The “by design” part of this should be obvious. Those who set the moral boundaries for how we talk about race in America get to control what we say about this, shall we say, sensitive topic. But more importantly, they set what we are not permitted to say with severe penalties for transgression. The control is disguised by the copious use of plural pronouns — “we,” “us,” “our” — pumped up with inspirational hoopla to give a false sense of collective agreement and unity to “our conversations.”
So, onto the specific metapolitical features of “racism” and “diversity.” Let’s consider “racism” to be an instrument of conversational control. With “control” in mind, you cannot help but notice how aggressively the use of the term is policed. The range of its permissible usage is assigned by — are you ready? — skin color, much the way access to public restrooms was restricted during Jim Crow, only in reverse pecking order. There is “racism” at the full disposition of the privileged aggrieved, as compared with a more restricted “whites-only” version.
It helps to think of these control measures in economic terms. “Racism,” understood as collective suffering, becomes a highly-valued commodity. For this commodity-of-suffering, blacks hold a monopoly. And it is a jealously, tightly guarded monopoly. What makes it so valuable is the moral indebtedness it imposes on those responsible for the suffering, the “racists.” “This is what the members of your tribe did to the members of my tribe — you owe us, Big Time! And, we’ll let you know what it will take to get you off the hook — and when that will be.” Not soon, for those of you who might be hoping. Think of the anti-racism movement as a powerful cartel bent on restricting competition in the victimhood marketplace.
The economic analogy also helps explain why in recent years the accusations of “racism” have exploded to the extent that gold-card “racism” has been upgraded to platinum-card “systemic racism.” “Systemic racism” reaches into every crevice and corner of American society — its history, its institutions, its essential core. Even inanimate objects are touched by it — statues, buildings, street signs. “Systemic racism” is evidence of what we might call a “moral national debt,” one we struggle just to pay the interest on. One hundred and fifty years after hundreds of thousands of white people killed each other putting an end to slavery, “reparations” are still on the table, with a long row of zeros on that invoice.
Thus, the policing. Thus, the monopoly. Thus, the debt. Those who insist that black people are capable of “racism” don’t understand how metapolitical lingo works, and they don’t have a handle on moral indebtedness. White people can’t claim possession of this commodity. Because? Because they are so much better off than black people. Because? They are racists, and racists don’t get to complain about “racism.” “Systemic racism” means a moral debt. The debtor and the creditor can’t be the same person.
So, only black people can be victims of racism. Only white people get to be “racists” and handed the tab. Black people are the creditors: white people are the debtors. This relationship resembles something like the old fashioned “company store” — an employee-only store (for whites) that accepts scripts issued by the company (owned by blacks) in advance of periodic cash paychecks. The store gives credit to employees before payday, turning them into perpetual debtors. The company store owns you.
You load 16 tons, what do you get?
Another day older and deeper in debt
St. Peter don’t you call me, ‘cause I can’t go
I owe my soul to the company store.
White people, collectively, are Tennessee Ernie Ford singing this song and owing their souls to the black-owned company store. They pay their scripts in the form of 16 tons of repentance, apologies, and favored, kid-gloves treatment. But what do they get? Another day older and deeper in moral debt.
The other control aspect of “racism” as a metapolitical word is another monopoly feature; “racism” as an explanation for obvious disparities in social-economic status and achievement. Why are blacks poorer than whites? Why are blacks more criminally inclined compared with whites? Why are there so few black computer scientists and physicists? The only permissible answer to questions like this is “white racism.” To suggest that there might be other explanations puts you up against another metapolitical word: “inequality.” “Inequality,” like “racism” is a moral marker. The two words work in tandem in a relationship of reciprocity. Racism leads to inequality: inequality is always the consequence of racism. You can’t have one without the other: they collude to keep the circle of conversation forever closed to other considerations. They hold an unbreakable monopoly on explanations of causality. Attempting to move outside of it makes you . . . “a racist,” putting you in a world of hurt. Remember: metapolitical words are always about control.
Now to “diversity” as an instrument of conversational control. Like “racism,” the “permission” to use “diversity” in conversations of race is allocated differently depending on skin color. The non-metapolitical meaning of “diverse” is “some difference relative to an arbitrarily selected category.” You can have a diversity of options, a diversity of opinions, a diversity of interests. It’s a ho-hum sort of word that in times past no one got worked up about. So much for ordinary language before it got hijacked by folks hellbent on controlling what you say about race in America.
Making sense of “diversity,” as we are now to understand it, is a dumpster dive into the bins of language corruption and degradation. Let’s begin the dive with another analogy that illustrates how much control is the driving force behind this word that requires every institutional leader to genuflect before its utterance — police action. Let’s see how this police action operates in today’s workplace, let’s say a university.
The university’s chief “Diversity Officer,” Dr. LaShawndra Robinson, is meeting with Chairman Professor Chen Li of the mathematics department. (Hint: “officer” in her job of “policing.”)
Dr. Robinson: “Dr. Li, as you know, I am here for our monthly review of your progress in recruiting African Americans for tenured positions in the math department. Your report for last month was not encouraging. I am thinking that you need to ramp up your efforts.”
Note: the math department is under regular “diversity” surveillance. Its chief is held to strict account. These meetings always have the feel of interrogation.
Dr. Li: “Dr. Robinson, the department has implemented its mentoring program. Our senior professors are actively, aggressively recruiting qualified candidates for open positions. We’ve had some success. The problem we are having is competing with other institutions to hire from a limited pool. We are in a bidding war, and we don’t have the funding to compete the way we would like to.”
Note: Dr. Li, while pleading compliance, is attempting a reality check. At the same time, he tries to push his “diversity” failure off on the budget people.
Dr. Robinson: “I refuse to believe that are not enough highly qualified candidates we can successfully compete for. We [she means “you”] just need to be more creative and innovative in your efforts. Please don’t take this the wrong way, but your annual review will take into account the strength of your commitment to diversity. Of course, I know you are deeply committed, but this needs to be reflected in the desired outcome — a truly diverse mathematics department.”
Note: What makes “diverse” “truly diverse”? Hint. Only Dr. Robinson knows, and she ain’t telling. It’s never going to happen under her watch, because she’d be out of a job.
Let’s take a close up look at this “officer’s” interrogation of the “suspect.” The diversity officer with a doctorate in African American Studies has a better grasp of the qualifications for university math professors than the chairman of the math department? Dr. Robinson’s MO closely resembles that of a political commissar in a communist dictatorship. There was one attached to every important office and function with no qualifications other than party membership and a bullying personality. The political commissar “enforces” the Party’s directives which bend stubborn reality into strict compliance with ideological phantasy. Commissar Robinson is less than subtly reminding Professor Li that mathematics is a lower priority than “diversity,” and that hiring a less qualified black mathematics teacher than, say, an Asian one, is what he must do — if he is to attain “diversity,” and if he wants a satisfactory annual review.
Everyone knows that “diversity” a euphemism for “more blacks needed.” What “diversity” doesn’t mean is diversity. A ninety percent black math department would be “diverse” the way the currently ninety percent black NBA is diverse. No “diversity officers” would be threatening anyone over this non-diverse outcome, just as you hear no one complaining about the lack of “diversity” in the NBA. Thus, the Orwellian “war is peace” mire into which we are plunged by having to submit to the policing actions of the diversity commissars.
“Racism” and “diversity” are about control. Those who accept them into their daily vocabulary and use them as “assigned” are following orders.
If you don’t like following orders, reject them “as assigned.” Then prepare to be punished.
You can find Stephen Paul Foster’s newly published novel here.
If you want to support Counter-Currents, please send us a donation by going to our Entropy page and selecting “send paid chat.” Entropy allows you to donate any amount from $3 and up. All comments will be read and discussed in the next episode of Counter-Currents Radio, which airs every weekend on DLive.
Don’t forget to sign up for the twice-monthly email Counter-Currents Newsletter for exclusive content, offers, and news.
Trevor Lynch’s Classics of Right-Wing Cinema
Institutional Racism Explained
A “Novel” Approach to the Understanding of Evil
Counter-Currents Radio Podcast No. 525 On Capitalism, Socialism, & the Ethnostate
Forgotten Roots of the Left: Fichte’s Moral & Political Philosophy, Part III
Chicago, Then & Now
The Roald Dahl Controversy
By the Twisted Word, Slain; By the Good Word, Saved . . . & Other Stories Part I
A chief criticism of Diversity is that the more of it you impose, the more everywhere looks the same. The same grotty fried chicken and oily curry eateries run by (and for the) same surly negroes or contemptuous moslems, all seething for some ‘offence’ to justify a riot or a beheading.
Marseille, London, Malmö … there is some (indigenous) local colour remaining but the direction of travel is always the same: the lawless filth-bestrewn entrepôt. Paradise for the merchants of the low-wage precarious ‘gig economy’, Hades for the rest of us.
I don’t want more diversity: if things worked well with historical levels of ethnic homogeneity, why change? But we all know the reasons. In the U.K. one cannot even suggest there might be, or have been, an indigenous British population without someone unleashing the furies of the lying BBC or the aptly-named Guardian.
One day, when the chaos becomes unbearable, the worm will turn and the timid hobbit-like native peoples of Britain (and beyond) will find their voices and their mettle. Until then let us stay alert and prepared.
” . . . One day, when the chaos becomes unbearable, the worm will turn and the timid hobbit-like native peoples of Britain (and beyond) will find their voices and their mettle. Until then let us stay alert and prepared.”
Indeed. That day is not far off judging by the erratic behavior of financial markets in this new year. One of the implicit assumptions behind diversity is that Western nations, which are still relatively high functioning, will remain high functioning with diversity in charge. This is necessary because only a high functioning society can throw off sufficient wealth for the armies of hideous, low IQ, angry, incompetent, 400 Lb. black diversity officers and their handlers and retainers to keep the diversity racket going. If the money goes bad for any reason it’s “game over” for diversity and its associated rackets.
Diversity is sowing its own destruction though because its demands are literally insatiable and destructive at the same time. As an example, the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy have had great success and their cadre of pilots, especially fighter pilots are, of course, overwhelmingly White. This is intolerable to diversity so the U.S. Air Force is embarking on a program of diversifying the ranks of pilots with minorities, apparently mostly Negroes. This will drive out White pilots and substitute colored pilots who “earned” their wings mostly because of their race, not competence.
If there were large numbers of interested, motivated, competent minorities available for pilot training and other high tech positions in the U.S. military they would have been recruited long ago and no “diversity” program would be necessary. Flying a fighter plane, even a WWII vintage aircraft requires skills, intelligence and a certain unquantifiable talent to avoid killing oneself (and others) that makes the cadre of pilots somewhat of a fraternity. Modern fighter aircraft are also expensive which means “diverse” pilots will only be flying during daytime, in good weather and only with basic maneuvers else they literally crash and burn.
Once the U.S. military is extra “diverse” according to the yardstick used by President Camel Toe Harris it will risk defeat at the hands of the non-diverse Chinese military in any future Pacific conflict. The U.S. Government will have to risk defeat or compromise with China on various disputes. What confidence is left in the U.S. dollar will evaporate as the world sees the 21st century “diverse” U.S.A. isn’t even a shadow of itself ca. 1960 when the U.S. straddled the world with hard and soft power.
President Camel Toe Harris and her handlers will talk and act as though it were still 1960 vis-à-vis the position of the U.S. until they are taught some hard and bitter lessons which they will refuse to acknowledge. Such is pride and “Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.” The wogs have pride by the ton as Kipling noted in “The White Man’s Burden”.
Other examples of “diversity” and its discontents could be multiplied ad infinitum. Universities have long been centers of “diversity” but now its the hard sciences under attack for lack of colored people (Asians don’t count). History is a minefield because of White achievement and lack of colored achievement. Any hard earned lessons from history will be suppressed because of this glaring inequality meaning there is no chance for competent, White Government officers who may have a grain of wisdom gleaned from studying historical successes and failures to influence policy. This is already a serious weakness in the U.S. which culturally has little sense of history anyway.
They can put any old jogger in a cockpit, fly a complete mission with all the pilots controls being handled by computers or a drone pilot in a rear area. Drop some bombs on a few cavemen or better yet evil white supremacists.
Return & land award said jogger a DFC.
Diversity mission accomplished.
Every so often throw a dart at a board. Then fly that unlucky nog through a heavily defended flack area low & slow. Aircraft is shot down.
Award nog the blue max posthumously.
Splash it all over, nog is a hero, statues and streets, schools named after nog. A Diversity big win. Rinse and repeat.
In a conflict with China, perhaps over Taiwan or the Senkaku Islands, air and sea power, both embodiments of modern technology will decide the issue. Behind the technology is always people who ultimately determine victory or defeat, not AI, robots or other high tech bullshit. Since the U.S. Government has chosen stone age primitives to be the people in charge at every level in a conflict against non-diverse China defeat is inevitable. The defeat will be blamed of course on White people.
The U.S. Government will learn nothing from defeat. It will be forced to agree to Chinese demands to recognize Taiwan as ruled from Peking, the South China Seas as Chinese waters and probably have to cede Wake Island, Midway and possibly Guam as part of the peace settlement. The rest of the world will learn that the U.S. is done as a great power astride the world, dictating terms. That will be China’s role.
President Trump and Secretary of State Pompeo just ended the One China Policy.
Are you surprised?
That was easy.
The states have been enforcing diversity quotas onto independent contractors who do government jobs, what that means from a private company perspective is that you have to have a certain amount of negroes on the job you’re doing for the government. So what ultimately happens is a few pavement apes are paid to stand around on the job doing nothing while everyone else actually works. It works this way because they have an uncanny ability to fuck everything up and bleed money so it’s just cheaper to pay them to do nothing. Factories doing military contracts have to have a revolving door of black hires who get trained just to eventually stop showing up to work, if the government is at all involved in your business they’ll force you to pay the negro tax. Now that’s what private companies do, government agencies like the post office have no such efficiency and neither do private in name only state utility companies, if it’s government run they’ll almost always hire along racial lines.
This is only going to get worse in the days ahead, obviously, but I’m curious how long it’ll take for the african termites the government has been strategically placing in key roles of maintaining infrastructure to weaken the foundation enough for a catastrophic failure. Can look to New Orleans for a glimpse into the future, freshly built infrastructure randomly collapses, anytime there’s a natural disaster the majority non White police walk off the job to let chaos reign and corruption is the norm not the exception. It’s ironic that in Africa the Chinese are building infrastructure meanwhile in the US we’re africanizing our infrastructure, if I didn’t know any better I’d say the people behind this diversity hire push are big Ted Kaczynski fans. If you want to make an advanced society into a primitive one nothing will accomplish that quicker and more efficiently than handing it over to negroes to maintain. At the rate things are going Ted might actually live to see his anarcho primitive society take form, in hindsight he should’ve teamed up with NGOs to promote infinite brown immigration to achieve his goal.
It starts off as a civil religion only to mutate into something with much more naked supernaturalism as the tide of color swamps out white liberals.
In other words, concerning this New Religion, you thought you knew how bad it is but we ain’t seen nothin’ yet!
You can have diversity or you can have equality. You can’t have both-
Myth and number one lesson taught in k-12 public schools: ‘Diversity makes us STRONGER.’
Great essay, beautifully written from start to finish.
I’ll be recommending many others, – including some deluded liberals – to read this masterful analysis on the scam commonly known as “racism”
Insightful and 100% correct.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Edit your comment