Very much a minor side note, but the observation that "only five percent of college presidents are Black women" was an odd way to highlight inequity, since that's just about their percentage in the population at large.

Expand full comment

Oubre sounds like your typical grievance grifter. And it’s customary that people like that get angry when challenged because they have no arguments except grievance. It does seem weird though that the trustees hired a black woman for a college that’s majority Hispanic. Ah well, diversity.

And Scott sounds like a nice person but very naive and clueless. Maybe there is such a thing as having too much money because you don’t care where it gets spent.

Expand full comment

Everything that's wrong with America today, captured in one fucked up story. If you're not sending your kid to Hillsdale College or something similar, you're wasting your hard-earned money. White guilt is a terrible thing, what a travesty...

Expand full comment

Whittier College, like many other ill run institutions, are destine for the trash heap. The sooner these places can be closed down, the sooner the labor force can adjust to the vast underemployment that exists because Colleges & Universities are churning out worthless degrees.

Expand full comment

I really like this point made by Denise Wong:

“And to promote diversity that doesn’t include all people isn’t really inclusion. It’s actually exclusion.”

True that!!

Expand full comment

First off, I do not seem to have any "lived experience", so I would not take myself very seriously if I were you.

Secondly, it is pretty clear that Nate Oubre's first task as Director of Innovation and New Ventures should be to purchase at least one of Hunter Biden's precious paintings That right there is the "System": create as many positions and as many departments as you can and place your people in them. The hard part is to get on the budget, to get on the trough. Once you are there, it's tough to get you out.

Or become a painter.

As per that cynical dimwit from Seattle Mackenzie. She says "systems in need of change". It's the same as the old one "mistakes were made", "someone did something"... Sure thing, you came into billions by brutally exploiting people mostly in Asia, and by equally mindlessly wasting resources. There is no free lunch, just like there is no $30 Fire tablet: there are only people forced to work for nothing, and resources that are plundered so that the rest of us can buy even more needless shit and the likes of Mackenzie can rake it in. We learned that from Walmart.

But the thing about this self obsessed dimwit is that she is not like even Oubre - who herself is a person in the system - Mackenzie owns the system. She can, if she wanted to, change the system at any time. She can make sure that Amazon workers can pee when they need to. For starters. Or give the same bennies to Amazon workers in the US as those that are given to Amazon workers in the EU.

If any meaningful change was in fact the goal.

The thing is though, and somehow Mackenzie and other Brooklynites cannot seem to get that, is that no gesture or money can wash them off. You cannot buy friends, or buy your way out of this mess.

Expand full comment

I'm so very unimpressed with Mackenzie Scott. If she'd been serious about doing good, she would have raised a stink when Bezos first instituted the brutal working conditions for the million plus men and women who now slave away in Amazon's many warehouses. But sitting by in silence while the world's largest company mistreats its employees lets Mackenzie Scott, who still owns 4% of Amazon, continue to amass her fortune, perhaps as fast as she can give it away.

What is the point of philanthropy? It's a money laundering scheme that lets the world's robber barons burnish their reputations as they cleanse their fortunes of the overpowering stench. So, Mackenzie Scott gives a few billion here and there to a bunch of poorly vetted woke organizations, and suddenly she's Lady Bountiful. Meanwhile Amazon's army of workers continue to pee in plastic bottles, and drop dead of heart attacks right on the warehouse floor.

Expand full comment

Do these people not realize that you can be Black and Hispanic? I’m Puerto Rican and half of my family are Black Puerto Ricans. The idea that only Black people (and a certain kind, at that) makes a place diverse is nonsensical and very destructive.

Expand full comment

“She just started bashing us like crazy, then started bashing the college for saying it’s diverse when it’s not”


If someone ever says the word ‘diverse’ or ‘diversity’ in your presence, and you fail to karate chop them, you are part of the problem.

Expand full comment

I’ve had something stuck in my craw for a while and this is the perfect opportunity to put it out there.

Power is at the centre of all human dynamics.

Liberals misapprehend this, they think it’s something unique to being in white. They think with a fresh start we can rebuild and make an equitable human power dynamic.

Such arrogance, such self deluded overreach. The nature of power is immutable and when you give away power the new group, the group in ascendancy, the group newly possessed of power will abuse it exactly as white people have abused it. The only difference is you will now be losing, you will be getting the short end.

This article speaks of the old white boys network and how this woman president Oubre is constructing her own similar clique and what a travesty it is. Holy cow man, what do you think? Of course that’s what’s gonna happen, it is not a travesty, it is a certainty.

When you make the marginalized powerful they will do as we have done and abuse that power: that’s what we humans are!

Liberals think we can deconstruct the police and then reconstruct state power and come up with something different! Fools: it will be a violent circular journey and we will return from whence we came.

Power corrupts; liberalism is delusional; we are lost.

Expand full comment

This financial/spending issue isn't limited to NFPs/Charitable donors either. It's infecting corporate procurement and sourcing decisions at an alarming rate.

My corporation was recently forced to update our procurement and temp labor sourcing systems to support DEI initiatives. It started with flagging all Suppliers that were minority owned so that anyone across the company could factor that into their decision on how to spend the company's money for their departments needs.

Now, a group of SJW employees are developing a proposal that we should ONLY be spending the companies money on Suppliers that are minority owned. I think we all know how this will ultimately end.... The powers that be at the company will cave in fear, employees will struggle to find qualified candidates from temp agencies, departments will end up paying more for less products and the work product will suffer.

I have personally pushed back against this in a limited way just by asking questions. "Is our primary goal to solve all of the worlds problems? Or is it to ensure the company is getting the best value for its purchases on products/ services/ external labor?" Needless to say, I've been hung out to dry on many occasions. With a second baby on the way, I can't risk rocking the boat too much. To be fair to my coworkers, nobody knows who to trust in pushing back against these kinds of things since no "listening sessions" have been established and nobody is sure who to trust.

If people viewing all aspects of their existence through the tainted lens of race and victimhood breeds intolerance, then companies basing spending decisions on race and victimhood breeds poor financial and operating performance.

Expand full comment

My first thought when I hear these types of things is that no one in America is more dangerous than a white liberal woman with a mountain of cash. They say that with great privilege comes great responsibility; Scott's and other tech billionaire wives handing out money willy-nilly without regard for how it is spent is irresponsible. It's like all the wanton corporate donations to BLM last year, likely now being regretted by some of the donors.

Second, it made me wonder if I would want to even apply to this college and others if I were white. I am clearly not valued and not wanted. Little wonder, as reported in WSJ, that young white men are abandoning higher education in droves. Why would you want to study for four years, and incur crushing debt, at a place that has contempt for you? These institutions are undergoing a deliberate effort to alienate white students, as well as faculty. They seemingly believe two wrongs make a right.

Expand full comment

Sorry, I know the Whittier story is the key but I can't get around the photo of Bezos and Mackenzie. $60 billion is a lot of money but, even so, it seems scant compensation for sleeping with that dwarfish gargoyle.

Expand full comment

The biggest red flag for me was that she did not chat up the two donors at the concert. The first priority of a college president is fund raising (“development”). Manna from heaven doesn’t count. That told me she put herself above the institution’s needs and it was all about power for her.

Expand full comment

First, McKenzie Scott got filthy rich because she married Jeff Bezos. Had she married someone else, no one would have ever heard of her. As for Whittier College, it's only real claim to fame is that it was Richard Nixon's alma mater. This huge gift will probably wreck the school but that's what fools with money do.

Expand full comment

What struck me is that there is ONE of her (Oubre) and many others (hundreds?) involved in the college who are living in fear of telling the truth about her incompetence. How does this happen? It’s painful to witness from the outside. No one wants to lose their job, I guess, is the simple answer, though she clearly should.

Expand full comment