US Higher Education and the Intellectualization of White Supremacy

US higher education has reflected and reinforced white supremacy, a particular form of racism, for hundreds of years.  Elite US universities were built and maintained through generations of land theft and killing of native peoples, the enslavement of Africans and their descendants, and the use of intellectualized propaganda to maintain the social order.  

Aspects of this ideology continue today and are visible to the well trained mind but invisible to the equally trained white supremacist mind, enough so that allegedly well educated people have the ability to deny or minimize its presence despite overwhelming evidence.  

White supremacy did not end when enslaved people were not held captive at universities.  It did not end with the creation of Historically Black Colleges and Universities.  It did not end when overt racial discrimination was challenged in the 1960s and 1970s or when affirmative action was instituted. It did not end with various types of ethnic studies.  It did not end with the oversampling of groups in health studies. It did not end in the 21^st century when students protested racist speakers or when the names of some rich and famous white supremacists were removed from buildings or endowments.  It did not end with anti-racist studies or when some schools hired people of color for powerful positions.  White supremacy is embedded today not just in history, literature, or criminal justice courses or in the science labs.  

How much white supremacy do you see embedded at your local college or university?  How is this ideology carefully taught?  Are matters of race and ethnicity ignored (color blind racism)?  How can you observe it systematically in the classroom and in the textbooks?  Do you see it in the racial and economic class makeup of the professors and the students?  In funding? In the recruiting of "legacies"? How do schools pit people against each other and invite animosity in the name of freedom of speech?  How much critical thinking is taught?  How much effort have these institutions really made to the correct the effects of hundreds of years of oppression not only at the school, but in the local community? What numbers can you share that expose the presence of white supremacy at your cherished school? 

A People's History of Higher Education in the US

[Editor's Note: What we saw today at the US Supreme Court--with the end of affirmative action in college enrollment--is horrible but not shocking.  The History of Higher Education in the US over the last four centuries is worse than horrible--from a People's perspective. In many cases it has been horrifying. Some of it has been documented.  Much of it has not. No one has documented the full-length of the terrain, the voyage that got us here, or to what may lie ahead. Looking in the mirror, and at the injustice, what do you see?]  

A People's History of US Higher Education is sorely needed, not as a purely academic work to gather dust on shelves, or as internet click bait, but as a way to assess how our nation moves forward as a democracy--or as something less. To make history, it's helpful to know (real) history: the history of working-class (and middle-class) struggles. 

The college and university industry faces enormous challenges in the coming years, and an elitist perspective that is taught in higher education perpetuates this societal mess: one of monumental (and widely acceptable) selfishness and greed, increasing inequality (see graph below) and reduced social mobility, decreasing life expectancy, lack of transparency and accountability followed by trillions in government bailouts to the rich, and profound environmental destruction. 

A Sketch of the Current Terrain

At the front end of the higher ed pipeline, the US is not producing enough domestic students with the resources or skills to succeed in college and beyond. Much of this is related to "savage inequalities" in the K-12 system (and throughout society) that have never been remedied. And in 2026 we expect an enrollment cliff to occur, a ripple effect of the 2008 Great Recession.

Community colleges and second-tier state universities--once considered the backbone of increasing democracy and social mobility, have faced declining revenues, lower enrollment, and public defunding for more than a decade.   

Adjuncts have become the "new faculty majority"--a trend moving that way for several decades--with little resistance.  Labor has had a few recent victories at elite schools, but it remains to be seen how strong this movement will become and whether it will spread to lower rung institutions.

Drug and alcohol abuse, sexual coercion and assault, bullying, and other forms of violence and brutality are long-standing parts of the US higher ed landscape that have not been fully dealt with.

Millions of folks are learning exclusively online. Subprime robocolleges (like the University of Phoenix, Purdue University Global, and University of Arizona Global Campus) and Online Program Managers (OPMs) have replaced traditional universities with little information about their value or effectiveness.  Those schools flood the internet with targeted ads.  

White supremacy and anti-intellectualism have regained popularity, with the higher education policies of Ron DeSantis in Florida, Greg Abbott in Texas, and Sarah Huckabee-Sanders in Arkansas. The Supreme Court has also spoken recently--ending affirmative action for people of color. Legacies and other meritless preferences for the more rich and powerful remain.   

Mergers, acquisitions, and campus closings are commonplace as schools compete for a smaller number of students and an even smaller number that can pay the full amount for tuition, room and board, fees, and living expenses. 

Elite universities are financial and industrial centers, scooping up (and stealing) land, investing billions overseas and paying few taxes, and hiring foreign workers instead of Americans.  

At the end of the pipeline, US higher education may be educating the world's elites, but higher ed and the larger society are not producing enough skilled workers/good jobs for Americans. There is a growing educated underclass, people who are working but are not working in areas that they had hoped for. There are many bullsh*t jobs out there. And many gig jobs with no benefits. And there are jobs that require long hours and difficult conditions, forcing people to choose between the personal and professional. Some folks are doubling down for career advancement, borrowing (sometimes unwisely) for graduate school. 

Student loan debt makes college graduates captive to the corporations who are willing to hire them--and subject to dismissal whenever they are no longer helping them make a profit. Even at non-profits this is the case. Crushing debt results in people who decide (logically) not to marry, not to have children--at the expense of being labeled as criminals and deviants. The Republican Supreme Court will soon weigh in on the subject and likely determine that debt relief would not be fair to others--presumably the wealthy and powerful that the Justices represent.  

Let's be clear.  Higher education in the United States has always reflected and reinforced a larger (sick) society and its ills. Its beginnings and much of its history are deeply rooted in white supremacy, patriarchy, and classism-- through land theft, genocide, worker oppression, and exclusion. 

There have been many excellent critical accounts of higher education over the last century, from Upton Sinclair's The Goosestep (1923) to Craig Steven Wilder's Ebony and Ivy (2013) to Gary Roth's The Educated Underclass (2019).  Recent books have also examined elite universities, state universities, and for-profit colleges and their predatory practices. But few if any assess the dark landscape from start to finish. 

A Sketch of Where the US Has Been

In the 1600s and 1700s, elite eastern schools like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Brown, and Georgetown were constructed on stolen land. The leaders of the exclusive white male schools held people captive in order to keep the schools running. All the students were white men or people who had to assimilate into the world of white supremacy. The schools also taught religious ideologies to rationalize their crimes against humanity.  What was it like for an indigenous person, an enslaved person, or a servant at one of these schools? How brutal was college life in those times?  

Government intervention was essential to increasing opportunity. After the Civil War, Historically Black Colleges and Universities enabled some African Americans to get a higher education. State universities and teacher's colleges also emerged with the promise of educating and empowering more citizens. And even then, land for state universities came from land theft of indigenous nations. Financial and industrial robber barons (men who stole wholesale from workers and their families), subsidized and controlled elite higher private higher education. These men included Leland Stanford, John D. Rockefeller, and Andrew Carnegie.  

Government funding through the post-World War II GI Bill increased enrollment (but disproportionate opportunity for white men) during the late 1940s and 1950s. The 1960s reflected a time of rebellion, greater access, and a movement toward equality. The Black Panthers, for example, challenged white supremacy at Merritt College and San Francisco State. But those days seem to be from a bygone era--a moment of opportunity lost. We do have some accounts of students and teachers, but is there one place we can find what life was like in junior colleges and lesser known state universities? 

Were the 1960s an anomaly? In 2023, it certainly appears so. For those activists who remember those times well enough, and remember the progress, it may be disheartening. Many citizens today are too young or not as well informed. Over the decades, even more have been disinformed--lied to--by elitist revisions of history.  

Battling the Business of Higher Education

Since the 1980s, US higher education has increasingly reflected and reinforced a nation of privatization, government austerity and lack of oversight, and social class exclusion. Elite credentials are used to discriminate in career fields (like law) where there is an oversupply; other careers (like nursing) are also hamstrung by hyper-credentialism--creating artificial shortages. 

Progressive organizations have been largely ineffective in battling strengthening corporate forces on campus.  The Fed and other organizations continue to sell the idea of more higher education for all, as millions face a lifetime of debt peonage.  There have been some heroes on the People's side, but they have been largely ignored by the mainstream media--which largely writes from an elitist perspective. 

We are now more than four decades into this neoliberal era. Higher education has changed, yet it still reflects much of what is wrong with America. Working class folks, and even many middle-class consumers are increasingly wary of higher education--whether it's worth buying into.  In some cases, edtech has reduced our Quality of Life. Is there anyone with enough energy, resources, and courage to document it all?  And can it be done from the perspective of the People--for the good of the People?  

Related links: 

HEI Resources

US Higher Education and the Intellectualization of White Supremacy

One Fascism or Two?: The Reemergence of "Fascism(s)" in US Higher Education

"Let's all pretend we couldn't see it coming" (The US Working-Class Depression)

The Tragedy of Human Capital Theory in Higher Education (Glen McGhee)

The College Dream is Over (Gary Roth) 

Erica Gallagher Speaks Out About 2U's Shady Practices at Department of Education Virtual Listening Meeting 

I Went on Strike to Cancel My Student Debt and Won. Every Debtor Deserves the Same. (Ann Bowers)

 

 

Chris Rufo and Right Wing "Civil Rights"

Chris Rufo’s recent article in City Journal, titled "New Right-Wing Civil-Rights Regime", is a prime example of ideological revisionism that fails to engage with history in any meaningful way. At its core, Rufo presents an interpretation of the civil rights movement and its aftermath that is both profoundly ahistorical and dangerously reductionist. While attempting to frame his argument as a critique of the modern Left’s grip on civil rights law, Rufo distorts the legacy of the 1960s civil rights movement and misrepresents the real challenges of racial justice in America today.

Chris Rufo, a senior fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute and a prominent figure in the battle against Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies, has gained significant influence in recent years for his aggressive campaigns to shift the national discourse on race and education. Rufo's rise to prominence coincided with his efforts to expose and denounce critical race theory (CRT) in public education, a tactic that has been instrumental in shaping conservative rhetoric around race. His latest article continues this trend, proposing that the Trump administration's attack on DEI programs in higher education represents a necessary correction to what he perceives as a Left-wing racialist agenda.

However, Rufo’s understanding of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its legacy is highly problematic. The article begins by referencing Christopher Caldwell’s The Age of Entitlement, a book that has been influential in certain conservative circles. Caldwell’s thesis, which Rufo echoes, argues that the Civil Rights Act marked a "fundamental departure" from America’s constitutional tradition. According to Caldwell (and by extension, Rufo), the Act, initially a noble effort to combat racial discrimination, eventually "consumed core American freedoms" and has been weaponized to entrench "left-wing racialist ideology" in American institutions. This narrative, however, overlooks the essential purpose of the Civil Rights Act—to eliminate legally sanctioned racial discrimination and provide equal protection to marginalized groups.

Rufo’s invocation of Caldwell’s book is troubling because it oversimplifies the historical context of civil rights legislation. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was not the beginning of a long, slow descent into tyranny, as Rufo suggests, but rather the long-overdue correction of centuries of systemic racism. The idea that it was somehow a “departure” from constitutional principles is a misguided reading of both the Act’s intent and the broader history of American law. To frame the Act’s enforcement mechanisms and subsequent civil rights policies as a threat to "core American freedoms" is a distortion that erases the basic reality of racial oppression in the U.S. before and after its passage.

The Legacy of White Supremacy and Structural Racism

What Rufo and those who echo his arguments fail to acknowledge is the enduring legacy of white supremacy and structural racism that has pervaded American society for centuries. The very system of racial discrimination that the Civil Rights Act sought to dismantle is far from a relic of the past; it is woven into the fabric of American institutions, policies, and practices in ways that continue to disadvantage Black people and other people of color.

One glaring example is the practice of redlining, where federal policies explicitly denied mortgage loans and insurance to Black families and other communities of color in favor of white neighborhoods. The result was the creation of segregated, impoverished urban spaces that continue to suffer from disinvestment and lack of opportunity to this day. In many cities, predominantly Black neighborhoods were intentionally situated near polluting industries, highways, and other environmentally harmful sites—leading to environmental racism. For example, toxic waste was often dumped in or near Black communities, subjecting these populations to higher rates of asthma, cancer, and other health problems. These practices are a direct manifestation of a racist infrastructure that systematically devalued the lives and health of Black and Brown Americans.

Similarly, housing policies throughout the 20th century—especially during the post-WWII era—were designed to exclude Black families from the expanding suburban dream. The GI Bill, which offered housing subsidies to veterans returning from World War II, was administered in ways that largely excluded Black servicemen from accessing these benefits. As a result, millions of white families were able to buy homes and build wealth, while Black families were largely left out, forcing many into substandard housing or limited to racially segregated neighborhoods with fewer opportunities for economic mobility.

The effects of segregation are not limited to housing, however. In education, the legacy of white supremacy has created an unequal system that continues to affect Black and Latinx students today. While Brown v. Board of Education (1954) officially declared school segregation unconstitutional, de facto segregation still exists in many schools due to housing patterns, local funding disparities, and state and federal neglect. Predominantly Black schools often face chronic underfunding, inadequate facilities, and higher teacher turnover rates, all of which contribute to a less equitable education for students of color. The persistent racial achievement gap in standardized testing, college admissions, and career prospects is not an accident, but the direct result of this long-standing inequality in education.

In the workplace, systemic discrimination continues to be a major problem. Job discrimination against Black and Brown workers has been documented for decades, whether in hiring practices, wage disparities, or promotions. Studies show that applicants with “ethnic-sounding” names are less likely to be called back for job interviews, even when their resumes are identical to those of their white counterparts. Even in fields like law, medicine, and finance—where education and credentials are paramount—racial minorities face significant barriers to advancement.

The criminal justice system is perhaps the most visible example of how structural racism is still a significant issue in the United States. The over-policing of Black neighborhoods, mass incarceration, and the disproportionate sentencing of Black Americans for similar offenses compared to their white counterparts are stark reminders of how racial inequality remains embedded in American institutions. Rufo’s argument that we have moved past the systemic racism embedded in our society ignores this reality, while conveniently minimizing or disregarding the lived experiences of Black and Brown communities.

"Colorblindness" as a Historical Evasion

Rufo goes on to argue that the Right, for years ambivalent about civil rights law, has now discovered its “winning argument”—one grounded in “colorblind equality.” This is where the article takes a dangerous turn, suggesting that policies such as affirmative action and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives are the result of a Left-wing plot to institutionalize racial discrimination. The article not only misrepresents the goals of such programs but also fundamentally misunderstands the role they play in a society that has never fully reckoned with its history of racial inequities.

The notion of “colorblindness” as the ideal model of equality, promoted by Rufo and others, is deeply problematic. While it may sound appealing in theory, in practice, colorblindness ignores the structural realities of race in America. It’s an abstraction that overlooks the lived experiences of racial minorities and fails to address the historical and ongoing disadvantages they face. In higher education, for example, DEI policies are designed not to perpetuate discrimination but to provide opportunities for those who have been historically excluded from academic spaces. Rufo’s argument that these policies are a form of “racialist discrimination” is not only misleading but actively harmful, suggesting that efforts to correct inequality are themselves a form of bigotry.

Chris Rufo’s Avoidance of Class in His Analysis

One of the most glaring omissions in Rufo’s analysis is his near-total avoidance of class as a factor in understanding systemic inequality. Rufo's focus is almost exclusively on race, specifically on how he perceives racial policies to be privileging one group over another, but he does not consider the ways in which class and economic status intersect with race to perpetuate inequality. This avoidance of class, particularly in the context of economic mobility and working-class struggles, weakens his entire argument and distorts the reality of how racism operates in modern American society.

Rufo’s critique of the modern civil rights regime seems to entirely ignore the vast disparities in wealth, income, and opportunity that are not simply a product of racial identity but of class-based systems of power. For example, his focus on “colorblind” equality in education does not account for the fact that the richest Americans, regardless of their racial background, have access to a far superior education and resources than the poor, who are disproportionately Black, Latinx, or Indigenous. The education gap that Rufo claims is a result of racial policies is also a direct consequence of economic inequality, where low-income communities—largely communities of color—are unable to access the same quality of education as wealthier, predominantly white communities. Acknowledging this would complicate Rufo’s narrative, as it would challenge the simplistic framing of a racial conflict between different ethnic groups, rather than a structural critique of the class divide in America.

Moreover, Rufo’s call for a “colorblind” society effectively erases the fact that poverty and economic disempowerment are racialized in ways that cannot be understood without examining the intersection of race and class. By focusing solely on racial hierarchy without addressing the role that economic disparity plays in sustaining social divisions, Rufo contributes to a larger ideological erasure of class struggle from the national conversation. His avoidance of class is a deliberate one, as it allows him to cast the issue of racial justice solely in terms of “identity politics” and to dismiss efforts aimed at addressing material inequality as divisive or unnecessary.

Who Will Be Receptive to This Propaganda?

While Rufo's article represents a highly selective interpretation of civil rights history, it will likely resonate with certain groups whose political and cultural leanings align with his critique of left-wing ideologies. These are individuals who believe that the modern civil rights agenda, particularly in the form of DEI and affirmative action programs, has gone too far and is now harmful to the interests of "oppressor" groups like white people, men, and even some Asian Americans. This demographic includes:

1. Conservative and Libertarian Thinkers: Many who align with conservative or libertarian ideologies are drawn to the narrative that civil rights policies have become a tool of social engineering, seeking to dismantle traditional values in the name of racial and gender equality. Rufo’s emphasis on "colorblind" policies will appeal to those who see government intervention as an overreach and prefer individual merit over group-based policies.

2. Populist Right-Wing Activists: The article will likely resonate with populist voters who view institutions like the Ivy League universities as bastions of elitism and left-wing ideologies. These individuals are often distrustful of academic institutions, the media, and governmental institutions, and Rufo’s framing of DEI as racialist discrimination plays into their fears of being "marginalized" in favor of minority groups.

3. Cultural War Foot Soldiers: Many of Rufo’s ideas are packaged as part of the broader culture wars. His framing of CRT, DEI, and "wokeness" as threats to American values is designed to rally those who feel alienated by changes in cultural norms, especially regarding race, gender, and identity. This group tends to be more reactive to what they perceive as a breakdown in social order, and Rufo provides a coherent narrative that positions them as defenders of a traditional, meritocratic society.

4. Right-Wing Media Consumers: The article is likely to appeal to consumers of right-wing media who are already attuned to the language of cultural decline and political correctness. These readers will be receptive to Rufo’s framing because it aligns with familiar themes promoted by conservative pundits.

In the end, Rufo’s narrative is one that is carefully designed for a particular audience—a segment of the American populace that feels threatened by the cultural shifts around race, identity, and equality. By presenting a revisionist history of civil rights and ignoring the deeply embedded structural inequalities of class, race, and economics, Rufo continues to peddle an ideological framework that is more about cultural warfare than actual justice.

Methods of Student Nonviolent Resistance

Resistance has been an essential part of democracy. And the Higher Education Inquirer has reported on a number of nonviolent actions taken by college students and workers across the US. We have also recognized the brutal physical and economic violence that has been a part of US history and social structure and a major contributor to the ineffective counter-violence that has sometimes resulted. 

According to the Albert Einstein Institution, "far too often people struggling for democratic rights and justice are not aware of the full range of methods of nonviolent action. Wise strategy, attention to the dynamics of nonviolent struggle, and careful selection of methods can increase a group’s chances of success." 

Nonviolent strategies include three broad categories: (1) nonviolent protest and persuasion, (2) noncooperation (social, economic, and political), and (3) nonviolent intervention. 

A list of 198 Methods of Nonviolent Action is posted on the Brandeis University website. The list is based on Gene Sharp's Methods of Nonviolent Action (1973), but this document is not exhaustive.  Strategies and tactics may need to change with what works in these times: with new technology and greater understanding about how humans think and behave.

 

Historical Examples

Nonviolent protests for justice and democracy and against white supremacy occurred at Shaw University (1919), Fisk (1924-25), Howard (1925), and Hampton Institute (1925-27).  

In the early 1940s, James Farmer, a Howard Divinity School graduate, with students from the University of Chicago established the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), an interracial group focused on nonviolent direct action for civil rights. 

The 1960s were recognized for student activism, including the formation of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), at Shaw University. This organization, and people like Ella Baker, were an essential part of the civil rights movement. 

In the 1970s and 1980s, divestment campaigns were an important part of the campaign against South African apartheid. Protesting for divestment against private prisons has also occurred on US campuses.  

Most recently, there were a number of campus occupations to protest the destruction of Gaza and the mass killing of civilians. And protests about climate change have been visible on a number of campuses for years. In these cases, we can expect more serious conflict to occur if these issues are not sufficiently addressed. 

As always, we appreciate your comments and constructive criticism.  

Related links: 

Black Study, Black Struggle (Robin D.G. Kelley, Boston Review)

A People's History of Higher Education in the US? 

Student Activism 

Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee

Modeling civil unrest in the United States: some historical cases (Bryan Alexander)

One Fascism or Two?: The Reemergence of "Fascism(s)" in US Higher Education

US Higher Education and the Intellectualization of White Supremacy

Democratic Protests on Campus: Modeling the Better World We Seek (Annelise Orleck)

HurricaneTWOU.com: Digital Protest Exposes Syracuse, USC, Pepperdine, and University of North Carolina in 2U edX Edugrift

Wikipedia Community Documents Pro-Palestinian Protests on University and College Campuses

Rutgers University Workers Waging Historic Strike For Economic Justice (Hank Kalet)

University of California Academic Workers Strike For Economic Justice (November 14 to December 23, 2022)

Terri Givens and “Radical Empathy: Finding a Path to Bridge Racial Divides”

I Went on Strike to Cancel My Student Debt and Won. Every Debtor Deserves the Same. (Ann Bowers)

DEBT STRIKE! (Debt Collective)