I’ve wondered if it’s worth sharing “my story.” I’m a pretty private person so it feels weird to share. But I think it�s worth it bc we all need encouragement that ordinary ppl can do something about what�s happening to our country. So, why do I talk about Woke stuff?
The Woke Mob: my survival story
My husband and I co-founded a justice-oriented non-profit org 11 years ago. At the time, we knew nothing about Critical Social Justice or Critical Theory. Our motivation was to address disparities in mental health care. 1/
We�d learned that lay people (ppl without clinical training) made up the majority of trauma care providers around the world working with vulnerable populations (refugees, human trafficking survivors, etc). We wanted to help equip those lay people with good resources. 2/
We hired clinically trained mental health professionals to develop our curriculum, oversee MEL, and run the international training program. Everything went great for about 7 years. We got accolades from all the right people in academia and partnered with orgs in 50+ countries. 3/
Then a few years ago we noticed a tone shift among our program staff. They became hyper-critical of *everything.* As Executive Director, my husband felt he was always on trial. Every word and action was scrutinized. We couldn’t figure out where this was coming from. 4/
We noticed shared rhetoric among the staff. Terms we heard often:
“systems of power and oppression”
Didn’t understand the ideology behind it, started doing some reading. 5/
Then the open letters started. The letters always went to everyone in the org (from the graphic designer to the governing board), they always asserted vaguely that the organization was “causing harm,” and they always ended with demands. We were alarmed and confused. 6/
We began having all-org sessions trying to discern what was happening and what was needed. It was quickly apparent there were no specific actions or incidents that could be deemed harmful. The accusations were always vague and abstract, about “identities”, “systems,” etc. 7/
What also became apparent quickly was they didn’t want to resolve any real harm. They wanted control of the organization. They stated explicitly my husband was incapable of running an org that addresses trauma (an org he founded!) bc he’s straight, white, male, and Christian. 8/
That’s when I learned to fight. I’d been doing my homework for a while. Thanks to people like @NeilShenvi, @ConceptualJames, @wokal_distance, @WokeTemple, @D_B_Harrison and @realchrisrufo, I knew what we were facing. It was an attempted woke subversion of the organization. 9/
I wrote organizational position papers on how Critical Social Justice compromised our work by being in direct conflict with a number of our organizational commitments, namely, being evidence-based, valuing the individual, cultural humility, and allowing for true diversity. 10/
Maybe I shouldn’t be proud of it, but I also learned to use their woke rules against them. When a staff member said I couldn�t speak to a topic bc I’m straight, I told her it was wrong of her to assume about my sexuality just bc I’m married to a man. She immediately groveled. 11/
After some months, when it was clear to them we wouldn’t budge, the ones making demands left “on moral grounds,” accusing us of every phobia and calling the org “white supremacist.” We’ve always partnered with ppl of every ethnicity, creed and identity, so this is laughable. 12/
Having survived an attempted power grab and character assassination by a woke mob, I’ll say it’s painful to be mistreated by ppl you trusted. But if you care more about maintaining your integrity than what people think or say about you, you�ll emerge with your dignity intact. 13/
Don�t apologize for vague accusations of “harm.” It’s not a fair fight. They don’t want dialogue. Expose their inconsistencies – show how their demands won�t achieve what they claim to care about (helping the poor, etc). It’ll require some reading and a lot of courage. 14/
If you don’t fight this nonsense now, wherever it’s showing up in your community, there�ll be nothing good, true, or beautiful to defend soon. We will be ruled by lies and power while being told we�re progressing toward truth and justice. 15/
Open war is upon us, there is no “safe” any more. Choose which kind of “unsafe” you want. Fighting lies is always preferable to being ruled by them. I believe they can be defeated. I believe the truth will prevail.
Thanks for reading my story, I’d love to hear yours. 16/16
[Do “Black and white people routinely commit crimes at similar rates,” if we focus on violent crime? Is “Black-on-Black crime … a myth”?]
An article by a criminal law professor Thursday in the Columbus Dispatch included this assertion:
The reality is that Black-on-Black crime is a myth, and that Black and white people routinely commit crimes at similar rates, but Black people are overwhelmingly targeted for arrest.
Yet I think this is not the reality, at least as to violent crimes of the sort that are usually labeled “black-on-black” when committed by black criminals against black victims. (Blacks and whites do seem to commit drug possession and drug distribution crimes at relatively similar rates, but in this post I focus on violent crimes.)
Here, then, is the data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ Race and Ethnicity of Violent Crime Offenders and Arrestees, 2018, with regard to “rape/sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault“:
Still, the best data that I know of suggests that
black-on-black violent crime is not a myth;
blacks and whites generally commit violent crimes at substantially disparate rates (and, for homicides, sharply disparate rates); and
as best we can tell, the disparity in arrest rates for violent crimes is pretty close to the disparity in crimes that are committed, and especially crimes that the victims report to the police.
We’ve discussed Critical Race Theory many times on this blog. But it’s easy to forget that it’s still not exactly a household word, even though it’s been dominating so much of the current turmoil, and has found its way into schools both private and public. It’s one of the most dangerous and divisive philosophies that has ever hit this country, and people need to learn what it is and why it needs to be fought.
Here’s the article. It’s long, but that’s true of just about any treatment of CRT, and this one is shorter than many. There’s really no time to spare in getting the word out.
No, Officer Sicknick didn’t die from a fire extinguisher to the head, thrown by Trump supporters on January 6th. Nor did he die from an allergic reaction to bear spray wielded by those same protestors. Here’s the actual story as announced by the medical examiner – which conforms to what for quite some time has seemed the most likely cause of his death to anyone paying attention to the facts:
Francisco Diaz, the chief medical examiner for Washington, D.C., told the Washington Post that Sicknick died on Jan. 7 after suffering two strokes and that he did not suffer an allergic reaction to any chemical irritants.
The medical examiner’s office told the Washington Examiner that Sicknick’s “cause of death” was “acute brainstem and cerebellar infarcts due to acute basilar artery thrombosis” — a stroke — and the “manner of death” was “natural.” The office said Sicknick was sprayed with a chemical substance around 2:20 p.m. on Jan. 6, collapsed at the Capitol around 10 p.m. that evening, and was transported by emergency services to a local hospital. He died around 9:30 p.m. on Jan. 7, the office added.
But the political damage was done by the Times reporting the lies about Sicknick’s death, and those lies almost immediately getting halfway around the world. I bet a lot of people will never read Officer Sicknick’s actual cause of death, and will instead continue to believe the lies.
And that’s the purpose of the lies in the first place.
The WaPo story from yesterday that announced Diaz’s findings also says this:
The ruling, released Monday, likely will make it difficult for prosecutors to pursue homicide charges in the officer’s death.
Yes indeed, it’s often “difficult to pursue homicide charges” when no homicide has occurred. But where there’s a will, there’s a way – as we’ve seen in the Chauvin trial, for example.
[NOTE: Glenn Greenwald, who has written a lot about the Sicknick case, has an excellent article about yesterday’s announcement, in which he states this:
It was crucial for liberal sectors of the media to invent and disseminate a harrowing lie about how Officer Brian Sicknick died. That is because he is the only one they could claim was killed by pro-Trump protesters at the January 6 riot at the Capitol…
…[C]able outlets and other media platforms repeated this lie over and over in the most emotionally manipulative way possible…
As I detailed over and over when examining this story, there were so many reasons to doubt this storyline from the start. Nobody on the record claimed it happened. The autopsy found no blunt trauma to the head. Sicknick’s own family kept urging the press to stop spreading this story because he called them the night of January 6 and told them he was fine — obviously inconsistent with the media’s claim that he died by having his skull bashed in — and his own mother kept saying that she believed he died of a stroke.
But the gruesome story of Sicknick’s “murder” was too valuable to allow any questioning. It was weaponized over and over to depict the pro-Trump mob not as just violent but barbaric and murderous, because if Sicknick weren’t murdered by them, then nobody was.
Much more at the link, including the fact that Greenwald had been derisively labeled by MSM reporters as a “Sicknick truther.” They will not be saying any mea culpas about that, either, nor about the other lies they promulgated. They will just move on to the next one.]
Justice is either the same for everyone, or it’s not justice. People are either punished according to their deeds and those deeds injuriousness to society, or they aren’t. But even the most lax of systems, in which everyone is left to defend themselves as best they can is better than one in which the law plays favorites.
When an entire class of people think they’re immune from punishment, no matter the reason — skin color, features, size, or whatever — those people will naturally supply the vast majority of criminals.
In fact, being human, they’ll let their inner demons out to play. The more so if everyone has told them others hate them and are “keeping them down.” They will unleash a reign of terror on everyone else.
And while the idiot activists and the left will cross their arms and nod and say it’s deserved…. well, no. Because people today haven’t done anything to unleash this.
But even if it were balancing some eternal scale, it would still be stupid. Because that’s not the way humanity works.
Sure, in the short term, they’re going to run every competent policeman out of a job, and those that remain will let black people get away with whatever. Which means the psychos who happen to be black will feel empowered and be even more blatant and obvious. The lack of police will also mean more vigilantism.
It also means you bring back, in the mid term, real racism. Because you know that black people won’t be punished if they kill you, how long till truck drivers refuse to enter black neighborhoods? How long before every store closes? How long before a black person in any setting is watched very carefully and with suspicion, because you know they have license to do whatever they want and no one will call them on it or punish them? Some of this is already happening.
In the long term, it’s going to lead to genocide. And not the say the left thinks it’s inciting it. The left assumes that it’s empowering black people and in the long run they’ll kill a majority of whites, or something.
And what the stupid policies of the left are doing is convincing people black people are dangerous and not quite “normal human.”
We do know how this ends up, because we’ve seen it.
Every primitive society that the Western Culture contacted thought of white people as just another tribe, about the size of their own tribe. So they practiced tribal warfare. You go to the village or settlement that has encroached on your territory and you kill everyone in HORRIBLE WAYS. This is important, because it shows how savage you are. The other tribe then backs off. Everyone is happy, and more bloodshed is spared.
The problem of course was that Western Civ wasn’t tribal; had a lot more people; and had the printing press. Which in turn caused them to read about the horror and decide these people weren’t QUITE human. Which led to a lot of the racism of the 19th and 20th century. It also led to the effective genocide of the Amerindians and the colonial subjugation of Africans.
Source: On Sparing The Rod
Yesterday, a Columbus police officer shot and killed a teenage girl who was in the process of attacking another girl with a knife. The police department rushed out the bodycam footage and presented it at a press conference.
Typical of the media coverage of the incident was this Washington Post story: Ohio police fatally shoot Black teenage girl just before Chauvin verdict:
Police said at a late news conference on Tuesday that the girl had threatened two others with a knife before the shooting, playing segments of body camera video that showed the victim lunging toward someone in a driveway before an officer fired four shots. A knife is visible in the driveway next to the girl as police perform CPR on her.
You would never know from reading the story that the girl had the knife in her hand and was in the process of attacking the girl in pink when she was shot. But that is clearly what happened if you watch the video.
That story is not an isolated example.
Why would a newspaper not report the clear evidence that the girl was attacking another girl with a knife that was visible in her hand for all the world to see? Why would newspaper headlines make this about race?
Donald Trump poisoned media criticism; even when the media misbehaved, calling it out always fed into a narrative that protected an administration fueled by lies.
But it’s time to call this what it is: media malpractice. This intense hyperfocus on race is spurring a moral panic, causing presumably otherwise rational people to jump to conclusions and trumpet them far and wide.
So far online the reactions I am seeing include:
- The police should never kill anyone under any circumstances.
- Why not shoot her in the leg, ar only shoot once? Or shoot the knife out of her hand?
- Knife fights with girls happen; what’s the big deal?
The widespread insanity inherent in these reactions, to me, is the kind of thing you see in a moral panic. And the media is stoking it by constantly playing up the racial angle, and failing to give statistics that might provide context to what we are seeing (such as noting the disproportionate number of police killed by black shooters, a fact that would contextualize the disproportionate number of blacks killed by police; or noting the currently uncovered examples of police shootings of white people). It’s malpractice and it’s creating a frenzy.
Something has to give.
They never cared in the slightest about Officer Brian Sicknick. They had just spent months glorifying a protest movement whose core view is that police officers are inherently racist and abusive. He had just become their toy, to be played with and exploited in order to depict the January 6 protest as a murderous orgy carried out by savages so primitive and inhuman that they were willing to fatally bash in the skull of a helpless person or spray them with deadly gases until they choked to death on their own lung fluids.
He’s right of course. If you support BLM then you necessarily support the routine verbal abuse of police officers as racists akin to the Klan. So it was very curious that a police officer would suddenly become the hero of this same group of progressives apart from the politics of doing so. In fact, you may recall people were simultaneously claiming Sicknick was a victim of the mob and that the same Capitol Hill police had treated BLM protesters unfairly. He was both a victim (where needed) and a perpetrator.
An update on my post yesterday about the Washington Post ‘s failure to update their police shootings database in at least one glaring instance.
First, I looked at their stated criteria and they do evince an intent to keep the database updated, which is good:
The Post’s database is updated regularly as fatal shootings are reported and as facts emerge about individual cases.
Second, I started combing through some of the other 2019 shootings of “unarmed” black men and found no other obvious errors. I did see a lot of shootings that seemed clearly justified, and some that were questionable. But there was a clear thread throughout: the suspects were to some degree noncompliant.
The civil rights activist who underwent use of the force training shown in this video concluded with this observation: “I didn’t understand how important compliance was . . . People need to comply with the orders of law enforcement officers for their own sake.”
People who say this on social media these days are roundly mocked and told they are minimizing racism and police abuse. They are told they are advocating a police state and they might as well be Nazis. But you could believe police abuse and racism are widespread and rampant and still advocate compliance because it saves lives.
It’s just a fact. Not a popular fact, but a fact nonetheless.
“Speak the truth, and leave immediately thereafter.” — Albanian proverb
Off. Brian Sicknick Scroll down, or take this link To Capital Coverup 3: Unlimited Hatred, where you’ll find the DC authorities have finally, at long last, released US Capital Police Officer Brian Sicknick’s cause of death. No, he was not hit in the head with a fire extinguisher, nor did he suffer any injuries at all […]Brian Sicknick: Now We Finally Know — Stately McDaniel Manor
It was a stroke, and not from a fire extinguisher or any other blunt instrument.
It was natural causes.
The Brearley School is a private all-girls school on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. It costs $54,000 a year to attend and, according to Bari Weiss, prospective families apparently have to take an “anti-racism pledge” to be considered for admission.
Brearley’s supposed commitment to anti-racism does not prevent it from discriminating on the basis of race in admissions and hiring. Nor does it stop the school from indoctrinating its students in the racist doctrines of critical race theory.
One parent has had enough. Andrew Gutmann has pulled his daughter out of Brearley and sent a letter explaining his decision to the families of every student body member (around 600 of them).
Bari Weiss presents the letter on her website. This is the full text:
Dear Fellow Brearley Parents,
Our family recently made the decision not to reenroll our daughter at Brearley for the 2021-22 school year. She has been at Brearley for seven years, beginning in kindergarten.
In short, we no longer believe that Brearley’s administration and Board of Trustees have any of our children’s best interests at heart. Moreover, we no longer have confidence that our daughter will receive the quality of education necessary to further her development into a critically thinking, responsible, enlightened, and civic minded adult.
I write to you, as a fellow parent, to share our reasons for leaving the Brearley community but also to urge you to act before the damage to the school, to its community, and to your own child’s education is irreparable.
It cannot be stated strongly enough that Brearley’s obsession with race must stop. It should be abundantly clear to any thinking parent that Brearley has completely lost its way. The administration and the Board of Trustees have displayed a cowardly and appalling lack of leadership by appeasing an anti-intellectual, illiberal mob, and then allowing the school to be captured by that same mob. What follows are my own personal views on Brearley’s antiracism initiatives, but these are just a handful of the criticisms that I know other parents have expressed.
I object to the view that I should be judged by the color of my skin. I cannot tolerate a school that not only judges my daughter by the color of her skin, but encourages and instructs her to prejudge others by theirs. By viewing every element of education, every aspect of history, and every facet of society through the lens of skin color and race, we are desecrating the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and utterly violating the movement for which such civil rights leaders believed, fought, and died.