Black Lives Matter

How Critical Race Theory Shows How Diversity Means Anti White Ideas

Executive Summary

  • Critical race theory is an evidence-free anti-white ideology that has even found its way into companies.
  • An excellent video dissects how ludicrous this and BLM’s ideology is.

Introduction

For many years critical race theory was limited to universities. Critical race theory has always been something for those who are close to insane. Therefore, it is surprising to see critical race theory surface in companies as part of sensitivity or diversity training.

See our references for this article and related articles at this link.

Excellent Video on Critical Race Theory

The following video is almost impossible to believe. It covers diversity training that is being provided by Sandia National Laboratories. The concerning thing is that Sandia is not some run of the mill company. It is a prestigious national lab and considered the equal of Los Alamos National Laboratory.

Both of these labs started their lives focused on nuclear weapons research, but have since diversified into many other areas of research. 

If what is described in the following video can occur at Sandia National Labs, then it can happen at any employer. 

This training includes training on “white privilege” and “white male culture.” I cover many of the areas explained in this 1-hour video. Many people who read this article end up watching the 1-hour video and get distracted and then don’t finish the article as the video is so long. I cover some of the most important aspects of the video, so it is probably a better use of your time to continue reading the article, and then come back and watch the video later if you really want to get into more of the detail. 

This video included a link to a website that described the training.

I’ve obtained exclusive whistleblower documents revealing that last year, the national laboratory sent its white male executives to the La Posada luxury resort to undergo a mandatory training called “White Men’s Caucus on Eliminating Racism, Sexism, and Homophobia in Organizations.”

In the opening thought-work session, the trainers demand that the men make a list of associations about white male culture. The trainers write “white supremacists,” “KKK,” “Aryan Nation,” “MAGA hat,” “privileged,” and “mass killings.”

The trainers insist that white males must “work hard to understand” their “white privilege,” “male privilege,” and “heterosexual privilege.” They claim that white men benefit from positive stereotypes that “far outweigh the Tim McVeighs and Ted Kaczynskis of white maleness.”

Next, the white male employees must expose the “roots of white male culture,” which consists of “rugged individualism,” “a can-do attitude,” “hard work,” and “striving towards success”—which sound good, but are in fact “devastating” to women and POCs.

In fact, the trainers claim that “white male culture” leads to “lowered quality of life at work and home, reduced life expectancy, unproductive relationships, and high stress.” It also forces this “white male standard” on women and minorities.

In a subsequent session, the white males must publicly recite a series of “white privilege statements” and “male privilege statements.” They must accept their complicity in the white male system and their role in creating oppressions.

Finally, as the reeducation camp concludes, the white males must write letters “directed to white women, people of color, and other groups regarding the meaning of this Caucus experience.” They apologize for their “privilege” and pledge to become “better [allies].”

Who is leading the struggle session? A company called “White Men As Full Diversity Partners.” This is no joke—their company is literally called White Men As Full Diversity Partners and they specialize in confronting those who “typically hold all the power”: namely, “white males.”

It’s time to expose this taxpayer-funded pseudoscience and rally the White House and legislators to stop these deeply divisive training sessions. My goal is simple: we must pass legislation to “abolish critical race theory” in the federal government. Let’s push as far as we can. – Christopher Rufo

Diversity Training at Sandia National Labs Also Emphases Why Men Can Do Things Women Can’t?

Here is a list that focuses on the differences between men and women that is also part of the training. With all of these extra abilities attributed to men, it seems to endorse discrimination against women!

This list also contradicts feminist assertions that there are no biological differences between the sexes and sex is merely a social construct. With many modern liberals not only is the biological basis of sex a construct, but cells and even mitochondria must also be a social construct. Many modern liberals demand an understanding of biology that is undifferentiated from the Middle Ages in order to be considered appropriately WOKE.

Biology professors that make factual statements, can now have fire alarms pulled on their speeches if their statement is considered “misogynistic” and “racist.” They can also be labeled “transphobic” for not accepting “gender fluidity,” which is the ability to identify as a man in the morning, and woman in the afternoon, and a man again in the evening.

The Analysis of Critical Race Theory Training at Sandia National Labs by Casey Petersen

This video is shocking.

Casey Petersen does an excellent job of both exposing what is being taught at Sandia National Labs, but in dissecting how ridiculous what is being taught in critical race theory. Critical race theory is based upon what amounts to an unlimited number of false claims. It shows that those who propose critical race theory either have no interest or no ability to perform analysis to verify or contradict the assertions of critical race theory.

Casey Petersen rightly points out at the end of the video how CRT is foundational to the assumptions of the BLM movement.

If blacks and non-blacks that subscribe to BLM have no idea what the numbers are that are killed by police and have an entirely false understanding of the numbers killed by police, then the BLM protests are based on false assumptions. If you know nothing about a topic, then you lose the right to have an opinion on a topic and especially a highly aggressive opinion on a topic. 

The term used by these black men is “cap” which is slang for lying. The statistics listed by the interviewee are not “cap” they are accurate. Neally all people that are killed by police in the US are armed.

This is not isolated. The vast majority of BLM supporters do not have any idea what the actual numbers are.

Also, notice that the young man on the far right proposes that all brown people need to stick together as they are all minorities. If a white person were to say the same thing, it would immediately be categorized as white supremacy. Tribalism is routinely advanced as a value for non-whites, while whites are expected to “allies” to non-whites. Imagine what happens over time if certain groups act tribally, while other groups are expected to not only not act tribally, but to serve as “allies” to groups that advocate tribal behavior. It is expected in the US that all non-white groups are justified in supporting their tribe over all other groups.

But that whites are evil if they do the same. This is a foundational element of CRT.

CRT as a Machine for False Assertions

Critical race theory is amazing for how it can make so many false assertions. Critical race theory is where the construct of “institutional racism,” another assertion without evidence, originated. “Intersectionality,” which is where every person’s disadvantages must be recorded and compared against every other person’s, is another concept to come out of CRT.

In reading the description of critical race theory in Wikipedia, it is essentially either the point of origin or a parallel presentation every terrible idea that extremist “racial justice” individuals and entities like BLM assert.

Critical Race Theory Now Part of Diversity Training?

The idea that critical race theory is being absorbed into “diversity” training at a Sandia National Labs when critical race theory is plainly anti-white tells us a lot about what the term “diversity” means.

Diversity has always meant anti-white. Every non-white person can use the term diversity to mean more jobs for their specific group.

At this point, the “diversity” training should simply be renamed to “anti-white training,” and the Sandia National Labs and many other companies should be honest about what they are training.

Not Just Casey Petersen’s Company

The following quotation indicates that this example is not an isolated instance of critical race theory being part of diversity training.

The Trump administration has instructed federal agencies to end racial sensitivity trainings that address topics like white privilege and critical race theory, calling them “divisive, anti-American propaganda.”

In a letter to federal agencies Friday, the director of the Office of Management and Budget said the president recently became aware of the racial sensitivity programs, which encourage frank conversations about race in the workplace and discuss potential actions to combat systemic racism.

The memo, issued by OMB Director Russell Vought, reads in part:

“All agencies are directed to begin to identify all contracts or other agency spending related to any training on ‘critical race theory,’ ‘white privilege,’ or any other training or propaganda effort that teaches or suggests either (1) that the United States is an inherently racist or evil country or (2) that any race or ethnicity is inherently racist or evil.”

“It’s absolutely astonishing how critical race theory has pervaded every institution in the federal government,” Rufo told host Tucker Carlson. “What I have discovered is that critical race theory has become, in essence, the default ideology of the federal bureaucracy and is now being weaponized against the American people.” – NPR

And Trump is 100% correct.

How CRT Obsesses on Race as the Root of All Societal Problems

There is an enormous number of areas of US society that could be improved. However, critical race theory disregards important areas of analysis, such as anti-trust enforcement, regulation of Big Tech, the overall concentration of power in society, money in politics, the minimum wage, income inequality, the problem with underfunded prisons, business corruption, just to name a few.

The list is a lengthy one.

However, critical race theory dispenses with all of this for an anti-white evidence-free doctrine that seeks to make the entirety of societal improvement on race and, to a lesser degree, sex. Critical race theory merely asserts various inequities, inequities that are proven wrong when evaluated against statistics. Unsurprisingly, critical race theory proposes an anti-scientific basis, that “lived experiences” trump non-anecdotal data. This has to be one of the only doctrines I have ever come across to actively argue against objectivity. And this is directly addressed in the following quotation.

The radical multiculturalists’ views raise insuperable barriers to mutual understanding. Consider the “Space Traders” story. How does one have a meaningful dialogue with Derrick Bell? Because his thesis is utterly untestable, one quickly reaches a dead end after either accepting or rejecting his assertion that white Americans would cheerfully sell all blacks to the aliens.

The story is also a poke in the eye of American Jews, particularly those who risked life and limb by actively participating in the civil rights protests of the 1960s. Bell clearly implies that this was done out of tawdry self-interest.

Perhaps most galling is Bell’s insensitivity in making the symbol of Jewish hypocrisy the little girl who perished in the Holocaust – as close to a saint as Jews have. A Jewish professor who invoked the name of Rosa Parks so derisively would be bitterly condemned – and rightly so. – Judge Alex Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals 

The History of Aggressive and Untestable Doctrines

Doctrines that are both aggressive and untestable have a long history of leading to violent outcomes.

This is the primary reason religions have had such a history of leading to violent conflicts. It is a major reason why the US 1st amendment was written as it was. The first part of it was for preventing the US government from establishing or endorsing any religion.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. – Wikipedia

This is considered one of the most essential governmental constructs in human history. For nearly 250 years, it has prevented religions from taking over the government and imposing their religious beliefs on others. And nearly every religion would change this rule if they could as each religion is its own intolerant evidence-free doctrine that respects none of the other intolerant evidence-free doctrines.

Modern-day religions have only come to be more peaceful, by not imposing their evidence-free claims as aggressively as they did in the past. The religion that behaves the most as religions tended to in the past, Islam, is marred by these modern conflicts.

Game of Thrones did an excellent job of showing the conflict-driven and problematic nature of religions. Humans are never more dangerous than when they are convinced they are right, and they are not expected to provide evidence for their beliefs.

Religions are very much in favor of something called “faith.” Faith is being steadfast in something you have no idea if it is true.

However, faith in what?

There are at last count 4,300 active religions.

Which religion is one to invest one’s faith?

Should one place all of them in a spreadsheet and then scroll until it seems like a natural stopping point?

Another thing one can have faith in is tarot cards. Is this a reliable way to make decisions? What happens if two tarot card readings contradict one another? 

Successful countries have demanded that people keep their faith more or less private.

Any country that does not restrict religion in this way, will soon become captured by one of the religions, and at that point, the believers in all other religions, as well as atheists, lose their freedom speech and of thought.

CRT As an Anti-Enlightenment Doctrine

Unsurprisingly, critical race theory also rejects The Enlightenment, as is covered in the following quotation.

Critical race theorists attack the very foundations of the [classical] liberal legal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism and neutral principles of constitutional law.

These liberal values, they allege, have no enduring basis in principle, but are mere social constructs calculated to legitimate white supremacy. The rule of law, according to critical race theorists, is a false promise of principled government, and they have lost patience with false promises. – Jeffrey J. Pyle wrote in the Boston College Law Review

Simply read the highlighted portion above.

Liberal values are only designed to legitimate white supremacy?

How can that be an actual sentence?

Living in a Society Based on The Enlightenment While Opposing the Enlightenment

This is a serious problem because Western civilization is built based on The Englightenment.

This places those that follow CRT as loggerheads with the societies in which they live. No doubt their interpretation is that the society is based upon white supremacy and The Enlightenment, just as liberalism is also based on white supremacy.

The center of The Enlightenment was France, which at the time was filled with white people! However, there might be some confusion as that does not mean the movement is based upon white supremacy. 

Finally getting exposed to CRT explains a lot, as a high percentage of blacks in the US have been talking in a way that seems unhinged for some time (BLM being just one example). And in a way that seems to demonstrate a disregard for numbers and evidence as we cover in the article Why the Claims by Black Lives Matter on Police Shootings Are False. The New York Times, which is now a WOKE publication infected by CRT, has started the 1619 project, which asserts that the official founding of the United States as evidenced in the Declaration of Independence, is dated as 1776, is entirely relevant to the real founding date of the country. And that the actual date the United States became a country was in 1619, which was when the first African set foot on what is now the United States.

This means that the United States engaged in a war with Britain — something we call “The Revolutionary War,” for no reason as the United States already had its independence in 1619 by virtue of a slave ship arriving with 20 slaves from Africa to a port in modern-day Virginia.

According to the New York Times, the leaders of the United States came together in 1776 to craft and sign a Declaration of Independence from England that was entirely unnecessary, as the United States had already been a country for 157 years. What could be the possible reason for such a monumental blunder? If only the United States and England were aware of this recently revealed information, they could have saved themselves the effort of fighting The Revolutionary War. 

Not only was the United States unaware of its own independence, but neither did Britain, as they contested the United States’ assertion of its sovereignty.

It is unknown when the New York Times will alter the founding of other countries.

I realize that it sounds like I made up the 1916 project, however, it is real. See for yourself at The 1619 Project. 

It is unclear what percentage of blacks and other non-whites adhere to CRT or think the 1619 project is a good idea, but it appears to be a high enough percentage to be a serious problem for the US. An additional problem is that many whites believe in these things also.

Conclusion

CRT is a doctrine designed for the non-thinking, and will eventually lead to violent conflict. It is a blueprint to increase tribalism and to ruin society. CRT has invading the mainstream and is either being promoted by or is simply increasing independently with the BLM movement.

CRT is now part of “diversity” or anti-white training. Furthermore, it is being administered to workers who are told they do not have the right to disagree with what amounts of CRT as a condition of their employment. HR pushed CRT based “diversity” training on Casey Petersen at his Sandia National Labs. As we cover in the article HR Professionals as the Stepford Wives of Corporations, HR departments see it as their job to railroad the employees into any program that has been approved by management. Certainly, employees that rests CRT based “diversity” training will have this noted on their personnel record.

As the HR department at Sandia National Labs stated (while they are only too happy to require the training), it is not their responsibility to ensure that anything in this CRT “diversity” training is accurate.