The National Archives and Records Administration Anti-Racism Taskforce found racism at the National Archives. Who could have possibly seen that coming?
You mean…the government employees that were put in a position to defend their government jobs found a reason to defend their employment? Shocker.
The anti-racism task force took umbrage at the National Archives rotunda for alleged “structural racism” because of paintings on display that — horror of horrors — portray the Founding Fathers in a positive light. This is clearly unacceptable to the wokescolds because they’re white men. The rotunda also “lauds wealthy White men in the nation’s founding while marginalizing BIPOC [Black, Indigenous and other People of Color], women, and other communities.”
The task force was formed in response to the George Floyd riots and the 105-page report was released in April but hasn’t received much attention until recently.
The authors of the report said that the murals in the rotunda of the National Archive building are offensive because they depict images of Native Americans driven off their land by settlers.
The rotunda is home to historical documents such as the Magna Carta and the Declaration of Independence. Of course, those are probably racist as well because they were written by white men and perpetuate “white supremacy” or some other nonsense.
Their solution is to “reimagine” the NARA rotunda with new “inclusive” artwork or “state performance art in the space” to show how we shouldn’t have so much reverence for the Founding Fathers.
‘While these massive paintings are historically significant and loved by many, others find them oppressive and exclusionary,’ the report, overseen by National Archivist David Ferriero reads.
It adds that a possible solution to alleged issue is to either paint new murals or ‘to stage dance or performance art in the space that invites dialogue about the ways that the United States has mythologized the founding era.’
The report says that “structural racism permeates all aspects of work and workplace culture at NARA.”
They propose a list of solutions from adding “trigger warnings” for visitors to creating “affinity groups” and “safe spaces” for employees. The Employee Affinity Groups (EAGs) are particularly disturbing because they organize individuals based on shared interests and/or immutable characteristics like race.
The document describes EAGs as “voluntary, employee-driven groups organized around a particular shared interest or aspect of diversity. Affinity groups are not intended to create a public forum or platform or to establish or promote any political or social agenda. Rather, they are established to facilitate employee professional development, cultural connections, and diversity and inclusion, and to promote employee engagement within NARA’s workforce.”
What could possibly go wrong with that? All it takes is one person to take the Washington Post’s advice and create a “white affinity group” and all hell will break loose.
Of course, the idea is that white people should either a) not create a white affinity group because they already have “structural racism” or b) create a self-flagellating white affinity group to reinforce the idea that all white people are racist and deserve to be marginalized.
At what point, exactly, do we say that this kind of thinking is itself “structurally racist”? They’re literally promoting segregation. Self-selected segregation, but segregation nonetheless.
Included in the task force’s report is a spreadsheet of terms that it describes as ‘legacy descriptions that use racial slurs and harmful language to describe BIPOC communities’, which it claims are further examples of structural racism. According to the spreadsheet, words like ‘crippled,’ and ‘illegal alien’ should be removed and avoided being used again.
It also highlights the use of offensive anti-Asian slurs used throughout the archive, and recommends adding a ‘trigger warning’ about texts containing words, to ‘forewarn audiences of content that may cause intense physiological and psychological symptoms.’
Years ago, people were making fun of “trigger warnings” on college campuses, and now, the National Archive is suggesting adding them to areas that display historical content in order to “forewarn audiences of content that may cause intense physiological and psychological symptoms.”
“Intense physiological and psychological symptoms” — really? How fragile are these people?
And it seems that the NARA anti-racism task force didn’t realize that the term “trigger warnings” is itself “oppressive language” according to Brandeis University.
In addition to adding ‘trigger warnings,’ the report suggests that the Archives ‘rewrite or discard’ online material in sources like OurDocuments.gov and Docsteach.org.
According to the report, OurDocuments.gov ‘often uses adulatory and excessive language to document the historical contributions of White, wealthy men.’ It cites the specific descriptions of Thomas Jefferson and his contributions to American history…
…Lastly, the report suggests long term solutions like fostering a more inclusive environment for black, indigenous, people of color (BIPOC) on staff and as guests. It recommends the NARA create ‘safe spaces that would allow employees to feel heard and empowered.’
Source: Daily Mail
One area of concern is that archival records contain “gaps, silences, erasures, and distortions of marginalized peoples, especially BIPOC”, so they suggest “If NARA records fail to adequately or accurately document the experiences of BIPOC, we must compensate by seeking alternative sources of material or interpretive methods informed by the latest scholarship, such as recontextualization and external loans.” (Emphasis added.)
What they’re saying there, is adding in things like the debunked 1619 Project and presenting history through the neo-racist academic lens of Critical Race Theory which has permeated our institutions.
So, if we implemented all of these ridiculous suggestions we could get rid of the anti-racism task force, right? Not a chance, Bub. You know these grifters are in there for life just like the “diversity, inclusion, and equity” officials at colleges, and (increasingly) in government and the private sector, right?
If America is such a bloody racist hellscape, then why do so many people around the world want to come here? Which country do these people think is better than the United States when it comes to freedom and equality under the law? The United States was founded on the “self-evident truths” that “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Where else in the world is that true? Sure, the U.S. isn’t perfect, but it is in the process of creating a “more perfect union.” The wokescolds undermining it are trying to tear the foundation of it down. And then where will we be?