Before the civil rights era, ALL presidential administrations in this country were both white supremacist and white nationalist. In the "modern" era, mainstream politicians learned to performatively eschew white nationalism and embrace what I call "rainbow white supremacy".

Some precisions might be helpful. White nationalism claims this country exists for the benefit of white people -- it's the legalization of white political power. White supremacy is closely tied to white nationalism, but is a broader assertion of white superiority and dominance.
From 1776 through the 1960s (roughly 200 years), the U.S. was an explicitly white nationalist and white supremacist society. After the 60s, many politicians abandoned overtly white nationalist rhetoric without redressing or dismantling centuries of white nationalist policies.
The most important thing to understand is that literally nothing was ever done by our political leadership during or after the civil rights movement to systematically uproot and dismantle the ideologies of white nationalism and white supremacy.
Instead, civil rights legislation and rhetoric were co-opted to *disregard* the white nationalist past and to *ignore* - or worse - *deny* the white supremacist present. (Cue the Bakke decision + every MLK quote used to undermine antiracist activism in the name of colorblindness)
So, to recap: After systematically institutionalizing, mainstreaming and normalizing white nationalism and white supremacist extremism for centuries, the modern political establishment decided to do nothing about either of these things after the civil rights movement.
I should clarify: By "doing nothing", modern political elites actively maintained the white supremacist status quo and much of the infrastructure of white nationalism, too.
Meanwhile, because the ideology of white superiority and entitlement to power was never systematically addressed, millions of U.S. Americans--especially but not only whites--simply continued to believe what their nation had taught them: that white lives matter more than others.
What has festered over the last 50 years is growing tension between performative public rhetoric of "multicultural inclusion" and the continued social, political and economic white supremacist norm, along with the cultural impact of centuries-long white nationalist programming.
What has been offered to Black people, Indigenous people and people of color within the current epoch of rainbow white supremacy is "inclusion" within a system that (still) channels most social, political and economic resources to people socially defined as "white".
Furthermore, the presence of said Black, Indigenous and POC individuals in certain positions of power (both in mainstream politics and extremist, fascist movements) is systematically used across the political spectrum to obscure or deny the continued existence of white supremacy.
Both white supremacy and white nationalism remain the ideological norm for millions of people. It might be said that the Republican Party has become the party of overt and whistle-dog white nationalism whereas the Democratic Party has become the party of rainbow white supremacy.
It remains to be seen whether mainstream Dems (both Party leaders and ordinary citizens) can be pushed to acknowledge and divest from white supremacy by supporting policies that systematically address the problem rather than relying on empty rhetoric and identity politics.

More from Society

Hi @officestudents @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk

The Equality and Diversity section of your job application has 'gender' in what appears to be a list of the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.

However...

1/15


However, 'gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.

https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u

Sex is the protected characteristic under the Act, but that is not on your list.

2/15


You then ask for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:

Male
Female.

3/15


Again, 'gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.

https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u

4/15


Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology, but you don't ask for that.

https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF

'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.

5/15
This is a piece I've been thinking about for a long time. One of the most dominant policy ideas in Washington is that policy should, always and everywhere, move parents into paid labor. But what if that's wrong?

My reporting here convinced me that there's no large effect in either direction on labor force participation from child allowances. Canada has a bigger one than either Romney or Biden are considering, and more labor force participation among women.

But what if that wasn't true?

Forcing parents into low-wage, often exploitative, jobs by threatening them and their children with poverty may be counted as a success by some policymakers, but it’s a sign of a society that doesn’t value the most essential forms of labor.

The problem is in the very language we use. If I left my job as a New York Times columnist to care for my 2-year-old son, I’d be described as leaving the labor force. But as much as I adore him, there is no doubt I’d be working harder. I wouldn't have stopped working!

I tried to render conservative objections here fairly. I appreciate that @swinshi talked with me, and I'm sorry I couldn't include everything he said. I'll say I believe I used his strongest arguments, not more speculative ones, in the piece.

You May Also Like

The first ever world map was sketched thousands of years ago by Indian saint
“Ramanujacharya” who simply translated the following verse from Mahabharat and gave the world its real face

In Mahabharat,it is described how 'Maharishi Ved Vyasa' gave away his divine vision to Sanjay


Dhritarashtra's charioteer so that he could describe him the events of the upcoming war.

But, even before questions of war could begin, Dhritarashtra asked him to describe how the world looks like from space.

This is how he described the face of the world:

सुदर्शनं प्रवक्ष्यामि द्वीपं तु कुरुनन्दन। परिमण्डलो महाराज द्वीपोऽसौ चक्रसंस्थितः॥
यथा हि पुरुषः पश्येदादर्शे मुखमात्मनः। एवं सुदर्शनद्वीपो दृश्यते चन्द्रमण्डले॥ द्विरंशे पिप्पलस्तत्र द्विरंशे च शशो महान्।

—वेद व्यास, भीष्म पर्व, महाभारत


Meaning:-

हे कुरुनन्दन ! सुदर्शन नामक यह द्वीप चक्र की भाँति गोलाकार स्थित है, जैसे पुरुष दर्पण में अपना मुख देखता है, उसी प्रकार यह द्वीप चन्द्रमण्डल में दिखायी देता है। इसके दो अंशो मे पीपल और दो अंशो मे विशाल शश (खरगोश) दिखायी देता है।


Meaning: "Just like a man sees his face in the mirror, so does the Earth appears in the Universe. In the first part you see leaves of the Peepal Tree, and in the next part you see a Rabbit."

Based on this shloka, Saint Ramanujacharya sketched out the map, but the world laughed