Once I was a child, my Black elders informed me, “It’s important to be twice nearly as good because the white man if you wish to achieve success.” They didn’t inform me the opposite aspect of it, although: that white males didn’t even must be half nearly as good as everybody else, and so they’d nonetheless get rewarded. I didn’t absolutely perceive that lesson till I began instructing faculty historical past. As a result of I’ve had white boys like Preston Damsky in my classroom: those who assume that slapping footnotes on racist rants turns them into scholarship. Those who mistake confidence for competence. Those who imagine their “viewpoint” deserves equal respect, even when that viewpoint is simply recycled white supremacy with MLA formatting.
Preston Damsky is a College of Florida regulation pupil who wrote a paper arguing that the U.S. Structure was meant just for white individuals. And never in some summary manner. He argued that “We the Folks” within the preamble ought to be learn to imply solely whites. That nonwhite immigration is an “invasion” that justifies shoot-to-kill orders on the border. That immigration coverage ought to return to pre-1870 requirements, which means whites solely. He even recommended utilizing AI to determine who’s “white sufficient” to immigrate right here. He referred to as for abolishing birthright citizenship for nonwhite individuals and questioned whether or not the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments—those that gave Black individuals citizenship and voting rights—is likely to be unconstitutional. And he wrapped all of it up with the cherry on high: warning that if the federal government didn’t implement white rule, white individuals have the “revolutionary proper” to overthrow it.
That’s not a authorized argument. That’s a handbook for apartheid. And let’s be clear: it wasn’t even a great handbook. It was sloppy. He ignored the precise debates that produced the Structure. He unnoticed the truth that the framers intentionally wrote the textual content to permit modification and evolution. He pretended the Reconstruction Amendments don’t exist, or that they’re by some means “illegitimate” as a result of they pressured the nation to acknowledge Black individuals as residents. He cherry-picked quotes from the Founders about “frequent ancestry” whereas ignoring the contradictions, the conflicts, the deliberate creation of a union that would broaden rights.
He referred to as nonwhite immigration an “invasion,” utilizing the identical previous white supremacist language that’s fueled violence for generations, however dressed it up in “nationwide constitutionalism” to make it sound respectable. He proposed state-sanctioned homicide on the border and pretended it was regulation. He referred to as for rolling again over a century of immigration reform that intentionally dismantled racist quotas. He even needed to make use of AI to run racial purity exams. Inform me that’s not phrenology with a login display screen.
He argued that Plyler v. Doe ought to be overturned so undocumented youngsters may very well be denied an training. As a result of nothing says “patriot” like punishing youngsters. He stated birthright citizenship for the youngsters of immigrants ought to be revoked, erasing the very assure of the Fourteenth Modification that was designed to finish slavery’s legacy of statelessness. And he didn’t simply wish to slim these amendments—he questioned whether or not they’re constitutional in any respect. Think about that: arguing the constitutional amendments that grant Black citizenship and voting rights are themselves unconstitutional. That’s the Dred Scott resolution with higher typesetting.
And for this? He received an award. Greatest paper within the class. A prize.
That claims every thing it’s good to know in regards to the professor who graded it. A federal decide who learn that mess and determined it was the strongest work the category produced. No feedback about its historic ignorance. No critique of its ethical emptiness. No problem to its authorized incoherence. Only a pat on the again for a well-executed white nationalist blueprint.
And the dean? When college students protested, she fell again on “viewpoint neutrality.” As if “Black persons are residents” and “Black individuals ought to lose citizenship” are equally legitimate views. As if “don’t kill migrants” and “shoot them on sight” are simply two sides of a good debate. That is what occurs when universities worship neutrality with out integrity: they fake there’s no distinction between critique and hate speech, between scholarship and requires racial violence.
As a result of let’s be actual. If a Black pupil turned in even half this rubbish in reverse—arguing that whiteness itself was the issue, that the Structure was constructed to safe white dominance and have to be overthrown—they wouldn’t simply fail. They’d be labeled harmful. Safety could be referred to as. Disciplinary hearings could be held. They’d be informed they don’t belong in that classroom, not to mention deserve a prize.
However a white man can argue that America is for whites solely. That immigrants ought to be shot. That Black individuals ought to lose their constitutional rights. That the federal government ought to implement racial purity. And the establishment not solely accepts it—it celebrates it.
This isn’t nearly one pupil. He’s not even that authentic. It’s in regards to the professor who learn hate speech dressed up as idea and stated glorious work. It’s a couple of dean who hid behind “neutrality” as an alternative of getting the center to say that is improper. It’s a couple of regulation faculty that put its identify on rewarding a plan for contemporary apartheid.
However right here’s what actually says all of it: this similar pupil was finally suspended, not for arguing Black individuals ought to lose citizenship or that immigrants ought to be shot on the border, however for making anti-Semitic remarks. That was the road.
The establishment was completely keen to tolerate and reward bigotry when it focused Black individuals and Brown immigrants, however when he turned that hate on Jewish individuals, then it was out of the blue disqualifying. It exhibits precisely whose humanity these so-called “impartial” establishments truly defend, and whose they deal with as disposable.
They informed us rising up we needed to be twice nearly as good. As a result of they knew white males may very well be half nearly as good—and nonetheless get all of the rewards, as long as they defended the system. Preston Damsky’s paper wasn’t distinctive. It was anticipated. And that’s the actual scandal right here.
Dr. Stacey Patton is an award-winning journalist and writer of “Spare The Youngsters: Why Whupping Youngsters Received’t Save Black America” and the forthcoming “Strung Up: The Lynching of Black Youngsters In Jim Crow America.” Learn her Substack right here.
SEE ALSO:
Florida Scholar Awarded For Racist Paper About Structure
Christian Nationalism Is America’s Most Protected Terror Pipeline