It's OK to be White
Once more, I’ll cover that very stupid Rasmussen poll question that supposedly showed that half of black people hated white people or thought they shouldn’t exist. As if a poll that only surveyed 130 black people1 could represent the views of 41 million black Americans. Apologies to my readers for hitting this topic again, but I got some pushback from people who were still upset by the poll, and so I thought I should explain in more detail why the poll results were, um, “OK.”2
No, Ian Miles Cheong,3 that’s not what that February 13-15 Rasmussen survey said.
The poll didn’t say that half of black people disagreed with “It’s OK to be white.” Only 26% of black people disagreed, 21% weren’t sure. And before you worry about that “half” claim, you should also note that 20% of white people also either disagreed or weren’t sure! Ditto for 41% of Hispanic and Asian people (lumped together under “other”). If you seriously think 50% of black people don’t want white people to exist, it means we’re facing a race war where 41% of Hispanic and Asian people and 20% of white people may be on the wrong side! (Or is that the right side? The unwhite side?) This seems beyond dubious.
For starters, people need to understand that Rasmussen chose those exact words because they were deliberately responding to a claim that those specific words were hate speech. They were trolling the Anti-Defamation League.
This is true. The ADL has a whole page devoted to It's Okay To Be White. The phrase was coined by 4chan trolls and then adopted by full-on white supremacists.
The phrase “It’s Okay To Be White” is a slogan popularized in late 2017 as a trolling campaign by members of the controversial discussion forum 4chan. The original idea behind the campaign was to choose an ostensibly innocuous and inoffensive slogan, put that slogan on fliers bereft of any other words or imagery, then place the fliers in public locations. Originators assumed that “liberals” would react negatively to such fliers and condemn them or take them down, thus “proving” that liberals did not even think it was “okay" to be white.
Whether the original trollers were white supremacist or not, actual white supremacists quickly began to promote the campaign—often adding Internet links to white supremacist websites to the fliers or combining the phrase with white supremacist language or imagery. This was not a surprise, as white supremacists had themselves used the phrase in the past—including on fliers—long before the 4chan campaign originated.
Wikipedia also covers it. There have been conflicts at American and Canadian universities when people have put up fliers saying, “It’s OK to be white.” Again, the universities’ objection was not to white people but to the belief, sometimes accurate, that the slogan was being used by actual white supremacists such as the Ku Klux Klan and The Daily Stormer.
The controversy even hit Australia.
On October 15, 2018, right-wing politician Pauline Hanson proposed an "It's okay to be white" motion in the Australian Senate intended to acknowledge the "deplorable rise of anti-white racism and attacks on Western civilization". It was supported by most senators from the governing Liberal–National Coalition, but was defeated 31–28 by opponents who called it "a racist slogan from the white supremacist movement." The following day, the motion was "recommitted", and this time rejected unanimously by senators in attendance, with its initial supporters in the Liberal–National Coalition saying they had voted for it due to an administrative error…
So, by Ian Miles Cheong and Scott Adams's interpretation, the Australian Senate voted unanimously that it was not OK to be white! Again, this is not what really happened. They voted down the motion because that particular slogan had become associated with white supremacists, and they didn’t want that association. (I feel bad for those senators who voted the ‘wrong’ way the first day because they didn’t know about the controversy. Oops!)
Anyone reading that poll question who is familiar with this controversy would know that there was something fishy going on. Why choose the exact words that, fairly or not, were being used by white supremacists? Was that most of the “disagree” vote? Probably not, but it has to be some of it.
“Well, fine, but what about all the others? They must hate white people, right?”
Wrong.
Look at the words again. “Do you agree or disagree with the statement ‘It’s OK to be white’?” Those are weird words. OK to be white? That is not the kind of neutral language that pollsters normally use. The unusual wording is apt to set off alarm bells in someone’s head. “What funny business is this pollster trying to pull?” People will be understandably looking for a trap.
For a lot of people, especially black people, I suspect “It’s OK to be white” brought up thoughts of slogans like “All Lives Matter,” “Blue Lives Matter,” or even “White Lives Matter.” Now you, dear reader, perhaps especially if you’re white, might think, “And what’s wrong with those slogans?” On the surface, nothing. All lives do matter. So do police lives. And white lives. But all too often those slogans have been used as a counter to “Black Lives Matter.” Not by everyone, of course, but many who say “All Lives Matter” have a problem with the slogan “Black Lives Matter.” They’ll chant “All Lives Matter” as a not-so-subtle ‘screw you’ to “Black Lives Matter.” A lot of black people know this. I suspect that a lot of the “disagree” votes in the Rasmussen survey were motivated by that knowledge. They weren’t hating white people; they were defending “Black Lives Matter.”
“OK, maybe, but the others who didn’t think those things, they must hate white people?”
Nope.
Some folks may find this hard to believe, but people interpret words differently. Even leaving aside the white supremacist and Black Lives Matter connection, people will read “OK to be white” in various ways. Maybe it means “white people are doing great,” and you don’t think they are. Maybe it means “white people are doing good things for America,” and you think some of them aren’t. Maybe you even think it means “it’d be OK to be white,” and you don’t want to be white!
I’m a college professor and know that interpreting words isn’t easy. I give my students straightforward texts to read and they come up with outlandish interpretations. Asking what a simple sentence means will get answers that defy all sense and logic. Experience has given me a lot of faith in humans’ ability to misread words.
And just look at that word “OK.” It’s incredibly vague—which is why good pollsters wouldn’t use it—with many meanings.
“How’d the test go?” “Actually, it went OK.” Pretty good, better than expected.
“How’s your food.” “It’s…ok.” Mediocre, barely acceptable.
“Do you want to have lunch?” “OK.” I guess.
“Do you want to marry me?” “OK!” Forever you hot handsome hunk!
“OK, fine, but some black people still meant it negatively.”
Some of those 130 people to some degree, probably yes. There’s a long history of white racism and some black people still harbor resentment. So yes, some black people (and not just black people) will think about that history and respond with “disagree.” White people are not “OK.”
That’s not the same as hating white people and thinking they shouldn’t exist. When you think that’s what they are saying you’ve gone and made a giant leap from a bad poll question to an apocalyptic genocidal conclusion. “They want us eliminated!”
A final silly gotcha from some kvetchers4 goes, “But if the poll had people disagreeing with ‘it’s OK to be black,’ everyone would be freaking out.” Maybe so, but there’s a lot of history behind why we get more upset when black people are attacked. A few hundred years of slavery and Jim Crow will do that. And that stuff hasn’t gone away. Timothy McVeigh blew up 168 people in Oklahoma City because he wanted a race war against Jewish and black people. Dylann Roof killed nine black people in a Charleston church because of his racist worldview. That’s why disagreeing with “it’s OK to be black” would carry more weight. Ignoring all that history seems dishonest to me. (Of course, if Rasmussen were doing a serious poll they would have asked that additional question.)
Is there any anti-white bias in society? Sure. Everyone can be racist, including against white people, including white people against white people! But a survey of 130 people doesn’t tell you anything about what black people en masse think.
There’s nothing to panic over.
Of course, a lot of people weren’t really panicking over a bad poll that said some black people didn’t think it was “OK” to be white. They were already panicking because they’d already convinced themselves that black people hated them. The poll just confirmed what they already knew to be true.
And Scott Adams? He was using a poll to justify the anti-black bias he already felt.
The best advice I could give to white people is to get the hell away from black people. Just get the fuck away…Because there’s no fixing this. You just have to escape. So that’s what I did. I went to a neighborhood where I have a very low black population.
Adams didn’t move to Danville, California, with a 1% black population, because of a poll. He’d already moved there. He gave the game away with his own words. “So that’s what I did.” It wasn’t the poll that made him do it. He’d long ago chosen to separate himself from black people.
I live in a city that’s 23% black. I’ve had black neighbors, friends, co-workers, teaching colleagues, students, and fellow poker obsessives. I’ve never felt hate from any of them. They didn’t seem to mind my whiteness. Did some have issues with “white people” as a group? Sure. I’ve heard a few arguments, some heated words, but not directed at me and not calling for anyone not to exist.
And if you don’t trust my anecdotal evidence, look at this chart. Black people have always been more open about connecting with white people than vice versa. We’re all a lot less racist than we used to be, but according to the chart, white racists still outnumber black racists. Do better white folk!
So, yes, it’s OK to be white. And it’s also OK to disagree with that statement. It doesn’t mean the sky is falling.
According to Rasmussen, there were 1000 people surveyed, 13% of whom were black.
My first piece, which focuses on Scott Adams’ racist reaction, was Dilbert Takes a Dive.
Ian Miles Cheong is a Malaysian guy who got his start in video gaming debates but now has become a right-wing influencer with 500k Twitter followers.
Kvetcher (or a Kvetch): a person who complains a great deal.
Literally in Yiddish “kvetch” means “to press” or “to squeeze.”
In a month, no one will remember this ludicrous poll except Scott Adams, who used it to justify his unhinged racist rant, and promptly lost his book deal and comic syndication.
The most absurd people have been elevated by social media...
Doing the lords work Carl. Thanks for throwing our National embarrassment Pauline Hanson into the mix 😂
I’d go so far as to frame her as ‘reactionary right’. She gives the sane right a bad name!