Why 3-D Printed Homes May Save Lives As Well As The Environment: Fill & Download for Free

The short answer is his motivators have grown in direct proportion to Elon himself.Ashlee Vance had a great answer I've read that would work for this question:What motivates Elon Musk? Is it existential depression from childhood and what does this mean?Also, James Altucher’s answer is exceptional (and the first answer) here:What can we learn from Elon Musk?Elon Musk, like everyone, has had to evolve over time. He has grown from a boy into an adult…from a college student into a businessman. During this transition his conditions have, at least three times, changed to the point where they are unrecognizable (at an average rate of 15 years):Pretoria and Philadelphia- completely different. Net worth about 0. Environment 13,000 miles from home.Philadelphia and San Francisco- completely different. Net worth will go from 0–100 million over a decade. Elon jumps from 99% to 1%.San Francisco to Los Angeles- similar environment. Net worth will go from 100 million to virtually 0, back to 100 million, beyond 10 billion, two orders of magnitude. Elon goes from 1%, back to 99% by reinvesting nearly all of his available capital, back to 1%, and today, beyond the 0.001% of Earth’s wealthiest inhabitants.Elon is now 46 years old and his motivations have grown over the years just like he has.Whatever motivated him at 16 isn't going to be sufficient alone.I'm going to put myself in his shoes and list a few things that are probably motivating on a daily basis, aside from everything else we always hear about, such as Mars and Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.So, tonight I go to bed as JoEl …and in the morning when I wake up, I am Elon Musk for the next 24 hours. Motivations will be as follows…I. Am. Iron Man.When I first open my eyes, I smile. After some meditation, a gratitude prayer, and hygienic rituals, I walk over to my bathroom, shower, wipe off the steam, and look at myself in the mirror. I'll remember the day I starred in a film where Tony Stark owns advanced AI named Jarvis. Then I'll go into the next room and the real Jarvis reviews my schedule over premium surround sound.I'll remember when the bathroom stank at the YMCA where I had to shower in California…and when I crashed my McClaren with Peter Thiel on Sandhill Road.I'll remember Tony Stark’s giant Arc reactor in the comics and movies. Then I'll look at architectural blueprints on the office wall of the Raptor and Gigafactory…the most powerful engine and largest factory ever built by man.I'll remember art imitates life and life imitates art. And this could be the latter.Only this is no imitation, this is for real.I am Iron Man.Nevada (rest in peace), Xavier, Griffin, Kai, Saxon, and DamianI'll make sure to check in on my boys before I leave the house. They mean everything to me. Unlike many parents, I have access to the BEST version of every single resource they need.That's why I created their own exclusive educational system. I get to filter and mandate the information they receive. I ensure the optimal techniques are applied. I eliminate the possibility of them experiencing the trauma of physical abuse by classmates. And when their day ends, I make sure we still have fun whenever I can.I give them all my strengths and none of my weaknesses.Twenty years down the road, I can definitely picture a PayPal Mafia made up of six variations of Elon Musk.Google + LarryI'll RSVP for the Google event in the Bay next week. I love those guys, especially Larry. Even through their AI scares me, I'm grooming Jarvis to be Anti-Skynet, so it's all good.Page and Brin motivate me.JeffI'm supposed to attend another breakfast and Amazon board of directors will be there, and that means my arch-rival. We are the only two making affordable rockets.Maybe we can work together. I like the sound of “Space Origin” (Since, “blue-x” sounds like something you buy off Craigslist and take at Burning Man).Our last meal together wasn't bad. JB is cool.Stock and PatentsI'll take the next 10–12 hours and kill it. I'll spend 4 with SpaceX management and 4 over with Tesla management. I'll check in on SolarCity. I'll spend a few hours on Neuralink (company) stuff. I'll read a book in the restroom and again during ride home. I'll eat lunch, and while I do, look at Tesla’s NASDAQ performance…We are the best auto stock in the United States and are solely competing with luxury car makers in Germany, in terms of share price. I feel good about that. Especially knowing some of these other car companies are using units we developed; the powertrain (Mercedes-Benz), battery systems (Daimler) and motor (Toyota) Tesla developed. Your welcome! New technology for all companies across the globe motivates me.EDIT: I also have to say the conglomerate that makes up all my team is pretty darn motivating as well. Here's what I said about the guys at Tesla in Zero-To-One :If you're at Tesla, you're choosing to be at the equivalent of Special Forces. There's the regular Army, and that's fine. But if you're working at Tesla, you're choosing to step up your game.-Elon MuskTransportation that isn't Tesla or Space-XAfter work and meetings and maybe a social event, I'll take some time and delve into sketching some VTOL designs on the way to Bel-Air.The new Boring guys just flew into town and I'll take a conference call with them. I've got a new hole I wanna dig.Once I get home, I'll look into 3-D printing some components on the convertible amphibian vehicle. Want to get a working model done in time for the Holidays.Having my own Transformer also motivates me.Video GamesBefore I get a couple hours of sleep, I’ll look at the beta demos of my math video games. Education is a huge motivator for me, so I've been making text books into games on the side.Finally, I'll play some Battlefront and Call of Duty WW2. I feel pretty lucky knowing I'm playing games that won't be released for another month. A little No Man’s Sky too, I love that game.Ahhh. Finally sleep……Oh, wait. Crap, I left the sword out again in the living room. I'd better put that thing away, it's really sharp.Wow, it's late. Since I'm already up, I may as well check in on mom, it's 7am in SA.So, to recap, Elon’s motivation is everything people usually mention about humanity and saving this planet, but it may also a few other things…Himself. His Children. His Friends. Skynet. Jeff Bezos. His Shareholders. Open IP. His Team. All Transportation. Alternative Learning. First-Person Shooters. Rare items of intrinsic value.And Mom.Thanks for Reading :)

1. Ender's Game (Ender's Saga, #1) by Orson Scott Card (1985; 375 pages)Hugo Award for Best Novel (1986), Nebula Award for Best Novel (1985)Andrew "Ender" Wiggin thinks he is playing computer simulated war games; he is, in fact, engaged in something far more desperate. The result of genetic experimentation, Ender may be the military genius Earth desperately needs in a war against an alien enemy seeking to destroy all human life. The only way to find out is to throw Ender into ever harsher training, to chip away and find the diamond inside, or destroy him utterly. Ender Wiggin is six years old when it begins. He will grow up fast.2. The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams (1979; 224 pages)“The quality of any advice anybody has to offer has to be judged against the quality of life they actually lead.”“Simple. I got very bored and depressed, so I went and plugged myself in to its external computer feed. I talked to the computer at great length and explained my view of the Universe to it," said Marvin."And what happened?" pressed Ford."It committed suicide," said Marvin and stalked off back to the Heart of Gold.”Seconds before Earth is demolished to make way for a galactic freeway, Arthur Dent is plucked off the planet by his friend Ford Prefect, a researcher for the revised edition of The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy who, for the last fifteen years, has been posing as an out-of-work actor.Together, this dynamic pair began a journey through space aided by a galaxyful of fellow travelers: Zaphod Beeblebrox, the two-headed, three-armed, ex-hippie and totally out-to-lunch president of the galaxy; Trillian (formerly Tricia McMillan), Zaphod’s girlfriend, whom Arthur tried to pick up at a cocktail party once upon a time zone; Marvin, a paranoid, brilliant, and chronically depressed robot; and Veet Voojagig, a former graduate student obsessed with the disappearance of all the ballpoint pens he’s bought over the years.Where are these pens? Why are we born? Why do we die? For all the answers, stick your thumb to the stars!3. Hyperion (Hyperion Cantos, #1) by Dan Simmons (1989; 481 pages)Hugo Award for Best Novel (1990), Locus Award for Best Science Fiction Novel (1990)“In the beginning was the Word. Then came the fucking word processor. Then came the thought processor. Then came the death of literature. And so it goes.”On the world called Hyperion, beyond the law of the Hegemony of Man, there waits the creature called the Shrike. There are those who worship it. There are those who fear it. And there are those who have vowed to destroy it. In the Valley of the Time Tombs, where huge, brooding structures move backward through time, the Shrike waits for them all. On the eve of Armageddon, with the entire galaxy at war, seven pilgrims set forth on a final voyage to Hyperion seeking the answers to the unsolved riddles of their lives. Each carries a desperate hope—and a terrible secret. And one may hold the fate of humanity in his hands.4. Dune by Frank Herbert (1965 ; 592 pages)Herbert's evocative, epic tale is set on the desert planet Arrakis, the focus for a complex political and military struggle with galaxy-wide repercussions. Arrakis is the source of spice, a mind enhancing drug which makes interstellar travel possible, and therefore the most valuable substance in the galaxy. When Duke Atreides and his family take up court there, they fall into a trap set by his rival, Baron Harkonnen. The Duke is poisoned, but his wife and her son Paul escape to the vast and arid deserts of Arrakis, which have given it the name Dune. They join the Fremen, natives of the planet who have learnt to live in this harsh and complex ecosystem. But learning to survive is not enough - Paul's destiny was mapped out long ago and his mother is committed to seeing it fulfilled.5. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? by Philip K. Dick (1968 ; 208 pages)“You will be required to do wrong no matter where you go. It is the basic condition of life, to be required to violate your own identity. At some time, every creature which lives must do so. It is the ultimate shadow, the defeat of creation; this is the curse at work, the curse that feeds on all life. Everywhere in the universe.”It was January 2021, and Rick Deckard had a license to kill.Somewhere among the hordes of humans out there, lurked several rogue androids. Deckard's assignment--find them and then..."retire" them. Trouble was, the androids all looked exactly like humans, and they didn't want to be found!6. Foundation by Isaac Asimov (1951 ; 296 pages)“Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right.”“Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.”“For twelve thousand years the Galactic Empire has ruled supreme. Now it is dying. But only Hari Seldon, creator of the revolutionary science of psychohistory, can see into the future -- to a dark age of ignorance, barbarism, and warfare that will last thirty thousand years. To preserve knowledge and save mankind, Seldon gathers the best minds in the Empire -- both scientists and scholars -- and brings them to a bleak planet at the edge of the Galaxy to serve as a beacon of hope for a future generations. He calls his sanctuary the Foundation.But soon the fledgling Foundation finds itself at the mercy of corrupt warlords rising in the wake of the receding Empire. Mankind's last best hope is faced with an agonizing choice: submit to the barbarians and be overrun -- or fight them and be destroyed.”7. Ready Player One (Ready Player One #1) by Ernest Cline (2011 ; 374 pages)Prometheus Award for Best Novel (2012)“In the year 2045, reality is an ugly place. The only time teenage Wade Watts really feels alive is when he's jacked into the virtual utopia known as the OASIS. Wade's devoted his life to studying the puzzles hidden within this world's digital confines, puzzles that are based on their creator's obsession with the pop culture of decades past and that promise massive power and fortune to whoever can unlock them. When Wade stumbles upon the first clue, he finds himself beset by players willing to kill to take this ultimate prize. The race is on, and if Wade's going to survive, he'll have to win—and confront the real world he's always been so desperate to escape.”8. Brave New World by Aldous Huxley (1932 ; 288 pages)“But I don't want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness. I want sin.”Brave New World is a dystopian novel written in 1931 by English author Aldous Huxley, and published in 1932. Largely set in a futuristic World State of genetically modified citizens and an intelligence-based social hierarchy, the novel anticipates huge scientific developments in reproductive technology, sleep-learning, psychological manipulation, and classical conditioning that are combined to make a utopian society that goes challenged only by a single outsider.9. Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury (1953 ; 159 pages)“Ray Bradbury’s internationally acclaimed novel Fahrenheit 451 is a masterwork of twentieth-century literature set in a bleak, dystopian future.Guy Montag is a fireman. In his world, where television rules and literature is on the brink of extinction, firemen start fires rather than put them out. His job is to destroy the most illegal of commodities, the printed book, along with the houses in which they are hidden.Montag never questions the destruction and ruin his actions produce, returning each day to his bland life and wife, Mildred, who spends all day with her television “family.” But then he meets an eccentric young neighbor, Clarisse, who introduces him to a past where people didn’t live in fear and to a present where one sees the world through the ideas in books instead of the mindless chatter of television.When Mildred attempts suicide and Clarisse suddenly disappears, Montag begins to question everything he has ever known. He starts hiding books in his home, and when his pilfering is discovered, the fireman has to run for his life.”10. The Martian by Andy Weir (2012; 387 pages)“ABOUT THE MARTIANSix days ago, astronaut Mark Watney became one of the first people to walk on Mars.Now, he’s sure he’ll be the first person to die there.After a dust storm nearly kills him and forces his crew to evacuate while thinking him dead, Mark finds himself stranded and completely alone with no way to even signal Earth that he’s alive—and even if he could get word out, his supplies would be gone long before a rescue could arrive.Chances are, though, he won’t have time to starve to death. The damaged machinery, unforgiving environment, or plain-old “human error” are much more likely to kill him first.But Mark isn’t ready to give up yet. Drawing on his ingenuity, his engineering skills—and a relentless, dogged refusal to quit—he steadfastly confronts one seemingly insurmountable obstacle after the next. Will his resourcefulness be enough to overcome the impossible odds against him?”11. Neuromancer by William Gibson (1984; 288 pages)“The Matrix is a world within the world, a global consensus-hallucination, the representation of every byte of data in cyberspace...Henry Dorsett Case was the sharpest data-thief in the business—until a vengeful ex-employer crippled his nervous system. Now a mysterious new employer has recruited him for a last-chance run. The target: an unthinkably powerful artificial intelligence orbiting Earth. With a dead man riding shotgun and Molly, mirror-eyed street-samurai, to watch his back, Case embarks on an adventure that ups the ante on an entire genre of fiction.”12. Artemis by Andy Weir (2017; 320 pages)“Jazz Bashara is a criminal.Well, sort of. Life on Artemis, the first and only city on the moon, is tough if you're not a rich tourist or an eccentric billionaire. So smuggling in the occasional harmless bit of contraband barely counts, right? Not when you've got debts to pay and your job as a porter barely covers the rent.Everything changes when Jazz sees the chance to commit the perfect crime, with a reward too lucrative to turn down. But pulling off the impossible is just the start of her problems, as she learns that she's stepped square into a conspiracy for control of Artemis itself—and that now, her only chance at survival lies in a gambit even riskier than the first”13. The Time Machine by H. G. Wells (first published 1895, 128 pages)“Nature never appeals to intelligence until habit and instinct are useless. There is no intelligence where there is no need of change.”So begins the Time Traveller’s astonishing firsthand account of his journey 800,000 years beyond his own era—and the story that launched H.G. Wells’s successful career and earned him his reputation as the father of science fiction. With a speculative leap that still fires the imagination, Wells sends his brave explorer to face a future burdened with our greatest hopes...and our darkest fears. A pull of the Time Machine’s lever propels him to the age of a slowly dying Earth. There he discovers two bizarre races—the ethereal Eloi and the subterranean Morlocks—who not only symbolize the duality of human nature, but offer a terrifying portrait of the men of tomorrow as well. Published in 1895, this masterpiece of invention captivated readers on the threshold of a new century. Thanks to Wells’s expert storytelling and provocative insight, The Time Machinewill continue to enthrall readers for generations to come.14. Snow Crash by Neal Stephenson (1992)“One of Time’s 100 best English-language novels • A mind-altering romp through a future America so bizarre, so outrageous—you’ll recognize it immediatelyIn reality, Hiro Protagonist delivers pizza for Uncle Enzo’s CosoNostra Pizza Inc., but in the Metaverse he’s a warrior prince. Plunging headlong into the enigma of a new computer virus that’s striking down hackers everywhere, he races along the neon-lit streets on a search-and-destroy mission for the shadowy virtual villain threatening to bring about infocalypse. Snow Crash is a mind-altering romp through a future America so bizarre, so outrageous…you’ll recognize it immediately.”15. The Forever War by Joe Haldeman (1974)“The Earth's leaders have drawn a line in the interstellar sand--despite the fact that the fierce alien enemy they would oppose is inscrutable, unconquerable, and very far away. A reluctant conscript drafted into an elite Military unit, Private William Mandella has been propelled through space and time to fight in the distant thousand-year conflict; to perform his duties and do whatever it takes to survive the ordeal and return home. But "home" may be even more terrifying than battle, because, thanks to the time dilation caused by space travel, Mandella is aging months while the Earth he left behind is aging centuries...”16. 2001 : A Space Odyssey by Arthur C. Clarke (first published 1968)On the Moon, an enigma is uncovered.So great are the implications of this discovery that for the first time men are sent out deep into our solar system.But long before their destination is reached, things begin to go horribly, inexplicably wrong...One of the greatest-selling science fiction novels of our time, this classic book will grip you to the very end.17. The Three-Body Problem by Liu Cixin (first published 2007)1967: Ye Wenjie witnesses Red Guards beat her father to death during China's Cultural Revolution. This singular event will shape not only the rest of her life but also the future of mankind. Four decades later, Beijing police ask nanotech engineer Wang Miao to infiltrate a secretive cabal of scientists after a spate of inexplicable suicides. Wang's investigation will lead him to a mysterious online game and immerse him in a virtual world ruled by the intractable and unpredicatable interaction of its three suns. This is the Three-Body Problem and it is the key to everything: the key to the scientists' deaths, the key to a conspiracy that spans light-years and the key to the extinction-level threat humanity now faces.18. I, Robot by Isaac Asimov (1950)The three laws of Robotics:1) A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.2) A robot must obey orders given to it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.3) A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.But what happens when a rogue robot's idea of what is good for society contravenes the Three Laws?19. Solaris by Stanislaw Lem (first published 1961 | 224 pages)A classic work of science fiction by renowned Polish novelist and satirist Stanislaw Lem.When Kris Kelvin arrives at the planet Solaris to study the ocean that covers its surface, he finds a painful, hitherto unconscious memory embodied in the living physical likeness of a long-dead lover. Others examining the planet, Kelvin learns, are plagued with their own repressed and newly corporeal memories. The Solaris ocean may be a massive brain that creates these incarnate memories, though its purpose in doing so is unknown, forcing the scientists to shift the focus of their quest and wonder if they can truly understand the universe without first understanding what lies within their hearts.20. A Canticle for Leibowitz by Walter M Miller (first published 1959 | 334 pages)In a nightmarish ruined world slowly awakening to the light after sleeping in darkness, the infant rediscoveries of science are secretly nourished by cloistered monks dedicated to the study and preservation of the relics and writings of the blessed Saint Isaac Leibowitz. From here the story spans centuries of ignorance, violence, and barbarism, viewing through a sharp, satirical eye the relentless progression of a human race damned by its inherent humanness to recelebrate its grand foibles and repeat its grievous mistakes. Seriously funny, stunning, and tragic, eternally fresh, imaginative, and altogether remarkable, A Canticle for Leibowitz retains its ability to enthrall and amaze. It is now, as it always has been, a masterpiece.21. The Long Way to a Small, Angry Planet by Becky Chambers (2014 | 443 pages)Follow a motley crew on an exciting journey through space—and one adventurous young explorer who discovers the meaning of family in the far reaches of the universe—in this light-hearted debut space opera from a rising sci-fi star.22. Childhood's End by Arthur C. Clarke (first published 1953 | 218 pages )Without warning, giant silver ships from deep space appear in the skies above every major city on Earth. Manned by the Overlords, in fifty years, they eliminate ignorance, disease, and poverty. Then this golden age ends--and then the age of Mankind begins....23. The Invisible Man by H.G. Wells (first published 1897)This masterpiece of science fiction is the fascinating story of Griffin, a scientist who creates a serum to render himself invisible, and his descent into madness that follows.24. Red Mars (Mars Trilogy #1) by Kim Stanley Robinson (first published 1993)John Boone, Maya Toitavna, Frank Chalmers, and Arkady Bogdanov lead a mission whose ultimate goal is the terraforming of Mars. For some, Mars will become a passion driving them to daring acts of courage and madness; for others it offers and opportunity to strip the planet of its riches. And for the genetic "alchemists, " Mars presents a chance to create a biomedical miracle, a breakthrough that could change all we know about life...and death.25. Cryptonomicon by Neal Stephenson (first published 1999 | 1139 pages)Cryptonomicon zooms all over the world, careening conspiratorially back and forth between two time periods--World War II and the present. Our 1940s heroes are the brilliant mathematician Lawrence Waterhouse, crypt analyst extraordinaire, and gung-ho, morphine-addicted marine Bobby Shaftoe. They're part of Detachment 2702, an Allied group trying to break Axis communication codes while simultaneously preventing the enemy from figuring out that their codes have been broken. Their job boils down to layer upon layer of deception. Dr. Alan Turing is also a member of 2702, and he explains the unit's strange workings to Waterhouse. "When we want to sink a convoy, we send out an observation plane first... Of course, to observe is not its real duty--we already know exactly where the convoy is. Its real duty is to be observed... Then, when we come round and sink them, the Germans will not find it suspicious."26. The Man in the High Castle by Philip K. Dick (1962)Hugo Award for Best Novel (1963)It's America in 1962. Slavery is legal once again. The few Jews who still survive hide under assumed names. In San Francisco the I Ching is as common as the Yellow Pages. All because some 20 years earlier the United States lost a war, and is now occupied jointly by Nazi Germany and Japan.27. Stranger in a Strange Land by Robert A. Heinlein (1961)Hugo Award for Best Novel (1962), Prometheus Hall of Fame Award (1987)“Jealousy is a disease, love is a healthy condition. The immature mind often mistakes one for the other, or assumes that the greater the love, the greater the jealousy - in fact, they are almost incompatible; one emotion hardly leaves room for the other.”The Hugo Award-winning and controversial science fiction masterpiece from Robert A. Heinlein, the New York Times bestselling author of Starship Troopers. Valentine Michael Smith is a man raised by Martians. Sent to Earth, he must learn what it is to be human. But his beliefs and his powers far exceed the limits of man, and his arrival leads to a transformation that will alter Earth's inhabitants forever...28. The Martian Chronicles by Ray D Bradbury (1950)Bradbury's Mars is a place of hope, dreams and metaphor - of crystal pillars and fossil seas - where a fine dust settles on the great, empty cities of a silently destroyed civilization. It is here the invaders have come to despoil and commercialize, to grow and to learn - first a trickle, then a torrent, rushing from a world with no future toward a promise of tomorrow. The Earthman conquers Mars...and then is conquered by it, lulled by dangerous lies of comfort and familiarity, and enchanted by the lingering glamour of an ancient, mysterious native race.29. Flowers for Algernon by Daniel Keyes (1966)“I don’t know what’s worse: to not know what you are and be happy, or to become what you’ve always wanted to be, and feel alone.”The story of a mentally disabled man whose experimental quest for intelligence mirrors that of Algernon, an extraordinary lab mouse. In diary entries, Charlie tells how a brain operation increases his IQ and changes his life. As the experimental procedure takes effect, Charlie's intelligence expands until it surpasses that of the doctors who engineered his metamorphosis. The experiment seems to be a scientific breakthrough of paramount importance--until Algernon begins his sudden, unexpected deterioration. Will the same happen to Charlie?30. The War of the Worlds by H.G. Wells (Published in 1897)With H.G. Wells’ other novels, The War of the Worlds was one of the first and greatest works of science fiction ever to be written. Even long before man had learned to fly, H.G. Wells wrote this story of the Martian attack on England. These unearthly creatures arrive in huge cylinders, from which they escape as soon as the metal is cool…31. Ringworld by Larry Niven (1970)A new place is being built, a world of huge dimensions, encompassing millions of miles, stronger than any planet before it. There is gravity, and with high walls and its proximity to the sun, a livable new planet that is three million times the area of the Earth can be formed. We can start again!Hugo Award for Best Novel (1971), Nebula Award for Best Novel (1970), Locus Award for Best Novel (1971)32. The Moon is a Harsh Mistress by Robert A. Heinlein (1966)It is a tale of revolution, of the rebellion of a former penal colony on the Moon against its masters on the Earth. It is a tale of a culture whose family structures are based on the presence of two men for every woman, leading to novel forms of marriage and family. It is the story of the disparate people, a computer technician, a vigorous young female agitator, and an elderly academic who become the movement's leaders, and of Mike, the supercomputer whose sentience is known only to the revolt's inner circle, who for reasons of his own is committed to the revolution's ultimate success.The Diamond Age by Neal Stephenson (1995)The Diamond Age: Or, A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer is a postcyberpunk novel by Neal Stephenson. It is to some extent a science fiction coming-of-age story, focused on a young girl named Nell, and set in a future world in which nanotechnology affects all aspects of life. The novel deals with themes of education, social class, ethnicity, and the nature of artificial intelligence.34. A Fire Upon the Deep by Vernor Vinge (1992)Thousands of years hence, many races inhabit a universe where a mind's potential is determined by its location in space, from superintelligent entities in the Transcend, to the limited minds of the Unthinking Depths, where only simple creatures and technology can function. Nobody knows what strange force partitioned space into these "regions of thought," but when the warring Straumli realm use an ancient Transcendent artifact as a weapon, they unwittingly unleash an awesome power that destroys thousands of worlds and enslaves all natural and artificial intelligence. Fleeing the threat, a family of scientists, including two children, are taken captive by the Tines, an alien race with a harsh medieval culture, and used as pawns in a ruthless power struggle. A rescue mission, not entirely composed of humans, must rescue the children-and a secret that may save the rest of interstellar civilization.35. The Dispossessed by Ursula K. Le Guin (1974)Shevek, a brilliant physicist, decides to take action. he will seek answers, question the unquestionable, and attempt to tear down the walls of hatred that have isolated his planet of anarchists from the rest of the civilized universe. To do this dangerous task will mean giving up his family and possibly his life. Shevek must make the unprecedented journey to the utopian mother planet, Anarres, to challenge the complex structures of life and living, and ignite the fires of change.36. The Mote in God's Eye by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle (1974)In 3016, the 2nd Empire of Man spans hundreds of star systems, thanks to the faster-than-light Alderson Drive. No other intelligent beings have ever been encountered, not until a lightsail probe enters a human system carrying a dead alien. The probe is traced to the Mote, an isolated star in a thick dust cloud, & an expedition is dispatched. In the Mote the humans find an ancient civilization--at least one million years old--that has always been bottled up in their cloistered solar system for lack of a star drive. The Moties are welcoming & kind, yet rather evasive about certain aspects of their society. It seems the Moties have a dark problem, one they've been unable to solve in over a million years.37. The Stars My Destination by Alfred BesterIn this pulse-quickening novel, Alfred Bester imagines a future in which people "jaunte" a thousand miles with a single thought, where the rich barricade themselves in labyrinths and protect themselves with radioactive hit men - and where an inarticulate outcast is the most valuable and dangerous man alive. The Stars My Destination is a classic of technological prophecy and timeless narrative enchantment by an acknowledged master of science fiction.

When I was a kid, we were taught very clearly, very explicitly, and very often the meaning of “racism.” Racism, at least to 3rd-grade me and everyone else in the 1990s, meant to treat someone differently because of their skin color.Merriam-Webster defines racism a bit more distinctly:"a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race."Between the two, you have what most people believe about racism. It’s a good definition, and operating by it has served us well. We’re objectively one of the least racist countries in the world and, at least until about 2013, we’ve only been getting better. But recent changes in the way racism is framed have fundamentally changed the word’s meaning, at least in practice.And, in all honesty, it’s a giant hairy mess. Deconstructing the modern-day meaning of the word “racism” is the only way to understand how Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s ideals—that one day his kids would be judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character—absolutely do not apply anymore.“Privilege”The idea of privilege entered the cultural lexicon as little more than a list of assumptions and generalizations about the power and luxury afforded to different classes and groups. It began when I was very young, with phrases like “a privileged upbringing” (referring to someone who is very wealthy). The term always carried with it a hint of shame and guilt. Later, the idea of privilege no longer meant simply being rich. Any group which people decided has been historically empowered against a different group (according to what can only be called a bizarre list of unfalsifiable assumptions, generalization, and dichotomies) became “privileged.” The idea of privilege was couched in the language of neo-Marxism and steeped in the concept of “oppression,” where everyone was either the oppressor or the oppressed.Men had male privilege; women were disadvantaged as a result. The old had privilege, while the young did not. Rich had privilege when compared to the poor. “Abled” people were privileged, and the “disabled” were not. All straights oppressed all LGBTQ, all Christians oppressed all other religions. Ignore the fact that these generalizations were antithetical to traditional liberal values (one of the foremost of which is “don’t make generalizations“). These hasty and often contradictory generalizations were now discussed as indisputable fact in many college classrooms and activist circles. It was a strange new blood libel that was beyond question.It wasn’t just that the privileged were blessed or fortunate in some way. No, we were shifting into an era where the mere existence of a difference (in some cases the mere perception of a difference) between two particular groups created some measurable disparity between them. And if there was a disparity, it became a zero-sum game. The group which was privileged won, and the non-privileged group(s) lost. And the benefit which privileged groups derived from their privilege could only have come about via intentional actions taken by that privileged group throughout history to ensure that it remained privileged and the other groups remained oppressed.Worse yet, only certain exceptions were allowed to be made. Never mind the fact that “some whites are poor.” That was covered in interclass conflict, but there was a hierarchy to privilege, wherein your white privilege mattered more than the oppression you received from being poor. Being poor didn’t matter as much as being white, simply put.So, by the beginning of 2010s, a new and obnoxious phrase became both a progressive rallying cry and an undefeatable rhetorical tool, handy for shutting down opposing views.“Check your privilege.”It was a tyrannical form of social censorship that disallowed nearly everyone from voicing their views, experience, knowledge, or even raw facts—because the individual was deemed bereft of the correct characteristics to participate in the debate. I take it back—that’s not really accurate. You could be white, or male, or Christian, or rich if you spoke against your group as an “advocate” of the “other.” That was totally fine, and in practice, the only acceptable position for one with “privilege.”For those of us who first encountered this sort of thing college (and have been encountering it ever since), it’s a familiar pattern. A white man could silence another white man if the first white man was an ally of black women (or the oppressed group du jour). Essentially, white privilege was the privilege of being intimidated with accusations of racism by people who see nothing else about you but the color of your skin, and believe you share the blame for the crimes of people of that same skin color to whom you are unrelated, and whom you have never met.Something else that was going on: many people were seeing that racism was more commonly shown by nonwhites towards whites than the reverse. Racism against whites suddenly became a thing, and everyone talked about it. A 2013 Rasmussen poll showed that most Americans, including blacks, felt blacks were more racist than whites and Hispanics. The results of this poll have been replicated numerous times since, most recently this year. [1]Numerous other inconsistencies were piling up in race-based discussions. Despite the left’s claims to the contrary, there was a distinct lack of supporting evidence that the police were systematically targeting and murdering blacks. Or that the economic inequality in black neighborhoods was actually caused by policies dating from the 1960s rather than white racism. Rather than address these inconsistencies, however, the left doubled down, pushing for stronger forms of affirmative action. Colleges and corporations instituted racial quotas, and minority students and job seekers were selected over better-qualified white candidates. Criticizing these obviously racist and illegal practices was viewed as racism and could get you fired. However, student newspapers printing articles saying “your [white] DNA is an abomination” (written by a Hispanic female student) were tolerable, even celebrated as free speech.What happened was that the old familiar definition of “racism” which we all grew up with had been intentionally transformed by the artificially applied context of oppression. Now, “treating someone differently based on the color of their skin” wasn’t sufficient, as it pointed to far too many examples of blatant racism among the wrong people. The left adapted by changing the definition of racism toRacism = Prejudice + PowerThat massive leap acknowledged the difference between prejudice and racism. Prejudice now became a negative feeling towards some generalized groups, whereas racism was racial prejudice in practice. But it included the idea of “power.” Power could mean many things, but in the new paradigm, privilege meant power. And going back to what we discussed earlier, it became unacceptable to generalize about any group except for privileged ones. It became acceptable to say that all whites were privileged and all blacks were oppressed. As our first black president took office, progressives claimed—with straight faces—that blacks systemically could not have power and… here’s the big one… black people could not be racist.So, being told that skin color alone should be why we pick the next president — not racist.Getting beat up for being a white kid — not racist.Whites needing higher admissions scores to attend the same colleges (and Asians as well) — not racist.It’s important to understand that wealthy whites who, by and large, live lives segregated from the problems of blacks and other minorities, but close enough to be aware of it, don’t experience these problems. Here’s a racial dot map of New York City. Look and see that the liberal dominated epicenter of culture and wealth is one of the most segregated cities in the world.That is to say, wealthy whites experience the problems of racism theoretically. They feel bad about the obvious disparity they witness. It’s hard to say privilege doesn’t exist when you were born into an area where all the white people live in nice homes and all the black people blocks away don’t. I get the guilt, but that experience isn’t universal. The sense of guilt is why so people many push to make things better for blacks, but rarely push anything that will tangibly affect themselves. They aren’t actually affected by new policy or theory and don’t suffer any reduction in opportunity or change in their way of life. But poor whites, such as those in rural districts and the Rust Belt, bear the brunt of these new “balancing the scales of history” measures. They are forced to work even harder with less (declining education standards and economic opportunities).In the United States, poor white people outnumber poor black people by 3 to 1. There are almost as many poor whites as there are blacks of any economic standing, period. But because a higher proportion of the African-American population is poor, the actual numbers of poor whites and poor blacks become irrelevant. In truth, whites and blacks in America are poor for the same reason. Blindly attributing poverty to racial issues, as many wealthier and more liberal whites do (disconnected, as they are, from the experiences of rural whites) is a mistake. This approach misses the actual source of many common problems. Often, as is made abundantly clear in the book Please Stop Helping Us by Jason Riley, the causes of poverty are themselves the unintended consequences of many poorly thought-out measures to help the poor, black or white.Instead, these policies make it even more difficult for poor whites to get ahead, and even lay the groundwork for saying that hatred by other races isn’t racism if it’s directed towards them. Remember, these are people who actually interact, as opposed to areas segregated by wealth. When we say that “black people can’t be racist,” it immediately and demonstrably creates an environment of animosity where bigotry towards poor whites is acceptable.Sad as it is to say, we are far from done.Some good news is that, despite whatever you may think, and despite the events of the last decade, America is objectively one of the least racist countries in the world. Various studies, such as this study from the early 2010s, have been conducted. These studies typically ask participants if they’d be OK with someone of another race living next to them. Most American participants answer “yes.” The United States, regardless of its current racial obsession (or perhaps because of it), is one of the most tolerant in the world. We’re actually the least racist right now than we’ve ever been, again by objective measurements and not perceptions.That’s something good and we should be happy about it. But we’re not. For various reasons, various groups gain a great deal of influence, power, and funding through furthering racial narratives. In so doing, they advance the idea of the “deep racism” in American culture. Whether this news is within the Overton window or not, America is far more racially tolerant than most places on the planet. Be happy.But inequalities still exist. Unless someone really wants to bite the bullet and say that decades of social science pointing to white racism as the cause of society’s inequalities was wrong, progressives have only two options: contest the data, or change the narrative on prejudice. How can they account for racial inequalities in a way that maintains narratives of oppression, when all evidence shows racism (at least the one we care about) has an inverse relationship with the inequality we’re angry about?Enter “unconscious bias.”Unconscious bias, alternately called “implicit bias,” states that even if people aren’t outwardly racist, or even if they don’t internally hold racist views, or are even trying to do the least racist thing possible even where it doesn’t make sense to frame a problem around race, racially prejudicial feelings lie within our subconscious minds affecting our conscious thoughts and actions.In effect, no matter what we think or do, we are still racist deep down inside.Of course, there’s little objective evidence for this, which is why so many scientists disagree with the validity of not just the tests[2] , but the notion.[3] Most of the tests for unconscious bias center around forcing people to make snap judgments based on the oppression matrix I shared previously. These tests don’t measure if unconscious bias is real, but to what extent a person is biased based on the time they spent giving their response—down to fractions of a second. This is not enough to form a valid social theory, let alone enough to justify sweeping policy changes for an entire nation.Yet that’s what we’re doing. Many of the “corrective policies” regarding race assume that racism, particularly white racism, is still the driving factor behind inequality. Racism leaches from deep within the minds of those in power, unbeknownst to even them, trickling into our laws, culture norms, and societal mores from the highest to the lowest levels. Where it can’t be proven that a person, or even whole groups, have a racially biased culture, racism is still blamed—thanks to the idea of unconscious bias, an accusation which no one can ever even defend themselves against.Essentially, no matter how hard we try, we are all racists.Don’t forget, however, that thanks to the dynamics of power and oppression, people of color can’t be racist. Let that stew for a while.It’s a problem because these anti-racist policies do hurt some people. Poor whites are again disadvantaged here. People are trained that they must recognize and compensate for their unconscious bias, and that certain groups (oppressed groups) are always the victims of this unconscious bias. It is then suggested that the way to do this is to show favoritism toward the groups delineated by oppression-based theories. The decision-makers then feel compelled to compensate for their own bias by looking for some reason to fail a white candidate for a position or opportunity. Again, this is actual racism. In practice.Following its singular evolution, the word “racism” was no longer a thing that people did to people of a different color. It wasn’t even prejudice, the views people had. It was something that whites did to peoples of color without even meaning to.Now we’ll shift the discussion of racism to a different realm: from the individual to the institution.Institutional racism, also called “systemic racism,” occurs when racism is built into the bylaws and policies of an organization. Slavery, and subsequently Jim Crow laws, which tried to prevent black participation in electoral process, and permitted businesses to discriminate against blacks by segregating them to separate facilities or barring them from entry completely, are examples of institutional racism. They are rules on the books intended to treat one race differently.The prevailing argument today is that institutional racism from America’s past, rules that were practiced hundreds of years ago, affect the lives of people today. The theory is that institutions which were around during those dark times and still survive today are forever marked by their “racist legacy.” Racism was present at their inception and for that reason, it has informed all follow-up decisions which the organization has made and its development, all the way up to the present day. Put differently, adherents of the theory of systemic racism say that whether or not racism exists in individuals, it exists at the organizational level. This is particularly true if those organizations and institutions were created during racist epochs, having inherited the racism of their founders, who subtly built racism into the very structure.It really doesn’t matter what events have transpired since then, what reforms have been made, or what apologies or policy changes these organizations have made—even when racist employees or members were purged, or racist policies stricken either by an act of law, or by the institution itself, voluntarily. The extremist view (which is gaining significant steam) is that an organization that in any way held a different standard of ethics than we do today, be it racism, sexism, or otherwise, is irredeemable and must atone for its crimes or be abolished. If the institution existed during a time more racist than today, they are part of whatever problems exist for racial minorities at present and therefore… racist. Worse still, any greater institution, such as the United States itself, which doesn’t solve the problem as the accusers see fit, is a bastion of institutional racism, and by that argument, a racist country.The problem with this idea is that it leverages history selectively.Systemic racism did exist. I gave examples of it. Jim Crow was systemic racism. But the Civil War was also fought, in large part, to end one form of systemic racism. Numerous bills were passed following in the aftermath to end systemic racism further, leading to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which made it illegal to treat people differently based on race. That didn’t make racism magically go away, but provided a legal framework for unfair policies in any organization to be challenged and for any racist policies to be stricken from the books. It preserves the organization, but removes the immoral parts.But modern proponents of systemic racism want to go further. Whole institutions which have a legacy of disparity, or are held to be guilty of racism in some way, shape, or form in the modern day, must be abolished in their entirety. The police are a good example of this. In spite of numerous studies demonstrating that police do not target blacks specifically, high-profile examples of white cops killing blacks have led to the widely believed assumption that the police are racist. Even in places where investigations show that the police are not acting in racist ways, in traditionally Democratic districts, with black chiefs of police and Democratic city councils, mayors, and governors, white racism is believed to be the cause of disproportionate violence perpetrated against black people by white cops. Administrators are absolved of all responsibility; the eternal bogeyman of racism is to blame. Where it can’t be proven that current racism explains a regrettable event, historic racism in the institution (the police, in this case) does. The police are institutionally racist, meaning that they will forever be racist because it is written into the system.Again, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was about finding and identifying the specific causes of racial disparity written into the system and removing them without breaking the system. The system matters. While it may not be perfect, it works. While you be disadvantaged for a time, you do not face the consequences of famine and war. Getting rid of the system gets rid of the good as well as the bad. It’s throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It is wisest to correct a system’s problems without destroying the system entirely and causing untold pain and woe to everyone dependent upon and existing within that system. That was the chief victory of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, not in removing racism, but allowing the system to correct itself over time. Eventually, once all the racist laws and corporate policies are systematically removed, we’ll have a functioning structure where people will be free to raise themselves up to equality. At that point, whatever inequalities still remain will not be due to racism, but other factors. Such processes take time. Undoing norms that have existed since the dawn of human civilization takes time, but time is better than famine and war.The idea of systemic racism does away with all that logic. An institution that has, for any reason, profited from or practiced racism in any way must be abolished to make up for past sins. This is the current argument against the police, where a need for vengeance is masked in nonsensical and unworkable plans to create better communities by getting rid of the police all together.Yeah, that won’t cause any obvious unintended consequences.Why have these almost predictably destructive ideas taken root? That has to do with something else we need to talk about: critical race theory.First, a basic definition:Critical theory is a social philosophy pertaining to the reflective assessment and critique of society and culture in order to reveal and challenge power structures.[4]Critical theory, race or otherwise, tries to identify, criticize, and undermine social institutions by viewing them from “the perspective” of disenfranchised or marginalized groups. Like Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States, Critical theory tries to reframe anything it views from the perspective of those who haven’t prospered under it, often going as far as to say that those systems were built to oppress them. Mind you, there is no one perspective of any group, unless we really want to say that all blacks have the same experience, or all women, or all anything. So the assumptions of marginalization are from “advocates” who speak for the whole population, whether anyone asked them to or not. These assumptions are also based on many of the same faulty metrics and produce wildly aggressive revisionist versions of history from the perspective of the “victims”. This can be seen in works like the New York Times’ 1619 Project, where revisionists have reframed American history around the implicit desire to enshrine slavery and the subjugation of blacks—even calling Abraham Lincoln a white supremacist.There are critical theories about everything on our our privilege axes, all producing nearly identical theories about how society was in some way manufactured with the expressed purpose of subjugating those on the bottom half of the axes. Only the supporting evidence changes, but the narrative of oppressor/oppressed remains.Despite the obvious fallacies involved in such a framework of thought, evidence to support it is abundant. That’s because history is an ugly place filled with things we would no longer countenance. Or perhaps it’s better to say that the ease of 21st-century civilization gives us the luxury to judge those who came before us. Critical theory doesn’t investigate how society has evolved, but instead looks to the history of any institution, be it the United States, Christianity, the US Army, the nuclear family (but not the Democrats), with the purpose of finding some evidence of its wrongdoing and inherent injustice. If the United States, at one time, supported racism (by engaging in slavery, for example), then the reforms made, the Civil War fought, the laws created to remove the power of racism don’t matter. Critical theory does not account for attempts made to improve the institution, only the negative weight of the institution’s misdeeds. This skewed approach justifies its adherents’ view that some predetermined group is marginalized today based on events which happened in the past. Specifically, this is done with the goal of reducing, and even destroying, the power of the institution in question.With all of that said, we need to talk about the left’s habit of inventing of institutions that need to be criticized. And that’s how we’ve arrived at the mother of all racist ideas, “Cancel Whiteness.”The new social theory of whiteness (as a social construct) takes the ideas of institutional racism and critical theory to their absolute limit. For our definition of “whiteness,” we will defer to the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of African American History and Culture:Whiteness refers to the ways white people and their traditions, attitudes and ways of life have been normalized over time and are now considered standard practice in the United States. And since white people still hold most of the institutional power in America, we have all internalized some aspects of white culture — including people of color.Which is to say that, in America, due to…(a) that thing called “privilege”(b) the preconceived notion that all relationships within a society are based on power(c) and the idea that one’s place in society is a zero-sum game, and(d) the theory that absolutely everything is about race…the mere fact that different groups have coexisted with one another throughout history has enabled one group to make itself superior to the other groups, and then consolidate their exalted position in society by promulgating pro-white traditions, attitudes, and “ways of life,” which have subsequently leached into our institutions and even into people of color, systematically keeping certain groups low and white people high.In other words, our race—which is prevalent in absolutely everything we do or say, every attitude we hold, every tradition we observe, every aspect of our lives—makes it harder for others and we should hold some sense of obligation to minimize the effects of our culture on them, even in our most mundane and innocuous cultural norms and practices.The idea of whiteness doesn’t acknowledge the fact that the same thing happens literally everywhere on Earth. There are social norms in India, China, and Africa. There are social norms I don’t even know exist, but that I’d better learn to adapt to if I were to move there. This opinion that others should assimilate into our culture by adapting to our norms, or even that we are successful as a culture because of these norms, it is a racist notion—but only if the culture demanding assimilation is a white culture.What specifically is mentioned? You’d be surprised at some of the things that the Smithsonian Institute are “too white”.Individual effort and traditional families are too white.Both reason and religion in America are too white.Wealth, being on time, and thinking ahead are all too white.Our holidays and the concept of law is too white.Competitiveness is too white.Finally, communicating well and being polite are too white.What this report is attempting to do is to list many of the traits common to Occidental culture (though also present in many other successful cultures) and stigmatize the very behaviors which make those cultures successful with a narrative of racial oppression. Being on time, nurturing strong families, working hard, taking responsibility, communicating effectively, etc. are simply behaviors that produce cultures that survive and thrive, as opposed to cultures which stagnate and die. That our culture is doing them isn’t something to stigmatize or be ashamed of.By its very nature, whiteness is oppressive to all other people throughout the world, innately subjugating them in subtle ways, especially those unfortunate enough to be forced to emigrate here. That’s because Western predominance forces the rest of the world’s people to subjugate themselves to white history, white culture, white ideas, and the damnable tyranny of being expected to clock in on time. Viewed through the context of critical theory, we see why whiteness causes harm and, if you are against racism in the form of institutional racism, you must therefore cancel whiteness.None of this is explicitly saying that white people should be punished or wiped out. Well, that’s not totally true. Sarah Jeong of The New York Times tweeted out a series of racist tweets against whites all the way back in 2014.And quite honestly, there are a lot of people who say these things outright. But rarely does this and even more explicitly violent racist talk directed towards whites get any major pushback.“Whiteness,” for now, is about saying that many, many behaviors common to white cultures are actually harmful to people of other races, as they were built for and by whites to empower themselves. The idea of whiteness combines many of previously discussed ideas—implicit bias, systemic racism, white privilege, and critical race theory—to suggest to people in positions of power that the only way to correct for the past is to “balance the scales” today. How? By taking actions which show preferential treatment to nonwhites in ways that, to 3rd-grade me anyway, seem pretty racist.Moving on.Let’s say you’re reader somewhere on the left. You might be a liberal, a progressive, or maybe a centrist. You might even be a conservatives who thinks I’ve gone too far. Somewhere in this write-up, I’ve said something many of you disagree with. Perhaps I was too vague somewhere, or perhaps I generalized too much. Okay. That’s fine. I’ve had to cover a lot of territory in a relatively short amount of space. You have the comments to hash it out. I like to engage with respectful people, if I have time, and go deeper where I can. It’s important that when we disagree that we first seek to understand the other person. That’s not to force them to agree with us, but to be more right ourselves.But there are others who would say differently. There are many who would say that this entire answer—anything I could have ever written critical towards the evolution of the idea of “racism”—is itself a form of racism. How? Because it is proof of my “white fragility.”It’s believed by many that we need to “talk about race.” We do, but not in the way they often mean. The Smithsonian Institution’s guide is one such example of how they think we need to talk about race. An older term is “have a national discussion.” The implication is that we aren’t already talking about race or having a discussion unless and until certain agreements are reached and concessions are made. We must talk about it until people agree with all the points I’ve listed above, including specific policy recommendations I’ve haven’t even talked about, and if we don’t, we really haven’t had a talk. That’s not a talk and it’s not a discussion. That’s a one-sided lecture, sometimes a sermon, and sometimes an interrogation demanding us to admit our guilt to crimes we didn’t commit. America doesn’t need to be lectured on race by people I’ve demonstrated can’t and won’t even agree on what racism means.My continued presence on the other side of the argument—actually having the discussion but not agreeing with the narratives—makes me “fragile.” If you disagree, you’re being defensive, and demonstrating fear or guilt. The assumptions of the white race are, in this case, beyond question, and anyone disagreeing shows “fear and guilt”. Never mind the possibility that they may be pointing out legitimately fallacious flaws in your logic or ideology, and never mind that their facts may better explain the narrative than the ideologues’. Literally any response, save acquiescence—arguing, silence, or even leaving the conversation—are evidence of white fragility.I have to ask the question now:How fragile is your ideology if it needs to codify dissent as proof of its opponents’ guilt?Debate—and the meticulous dissection of ideas in search of flaws and inconsistencies—is necessary to finding truth, and truth is necessary to solving problems. The “fragility” rhetoric can, and is, copied-and-pasted into literally every “marginalized group” on the axes of oppression. Nothing even needs to be restated other than the adjective of “white” or “male” or “straight.” It’s an unfalsifiable ad hominem against people who disagree for any reason. If your ideology faces so much criticism that it must stigmatize the criticism rather than acknowledge and correct for the faults, then it isn’t a valid theory. It’s not a theory at all. It’s little different than a bad religion, or a cult.Lastly, “anti-racism.”Ibram Kendi, the author of the book How to Be an Anti-Racist says, “There’s no such thing as being ‘not racist.’ We are either being racist or antiracist.”Anti-racism is a new movement within the racial debate. Anti-racism says that simply being “not racist” isn’t enough. Being tolerant and being inclusive aren’t enough. You must be actively fighting against the forces of racism to be considered an “anti-racist.” It isn’t just about saying, “I don’t support the KKK or Nazis. Everything in this answer so far is the ‘forces of racism.’” And unless you fight all of them… you’re a racist. Kendi breaks from the definition of racism I stated earlier, believing that race is the primary determinant of human traits and that some races are distinctly better. He defines racism as:"One who is supporting a racist policy through their actions or inaction or expressing a racist idea."Who determines what actions are enough, or which ideas are racist? The same people who say that being on time or working hard are too white, or that all whites and all blacks have the same experiences and can therefore be generalized as one oppressed the other merely by existing, or that history only matters if it’s bad and that reforms to bring about equality don’t count. Nearly anything an average person could or would believe falls under “racist ideas.”The idea that some elite class of activists gets to determine what “racist ideas” are or aren’t should set off more red flags than a May Day Parade in Moscow. There’s a whole host of “you’re either with us or you’re against us” problems that opens up. It gets even worse in this Forbes article, 5 Disturbing Signs That You Might Not Be An Antiracist After All.Indeed, while the discrimination focus in years past was rejecting blatant, egregious, confederate flag flying, “where did I put my hood” white supremacist racists, in 2020 there seems to be much more focus on the middle of the road, self-proclaimed white progressives who dangerously straddle the fence just enough to allow the fire to rage on. While they may reject racism in its most obvious and overt variety, they haven’t necessarily made concrete changes in their daily lives to fully embrace antiracism.The article attacks people for not speaking up soon enough or loud enough, not explaining why they didn’t do more, and not personally sacrificing something. It even claims that people who the anti-racist crowd have deemed to be racists are too comfortable around you is itself a form of racism. I’ll repeat that last one. You’re a racist if people they think are racists don’t hate you.How is it possible to argue that someone is guilty of thought crime based on the actions of other people? How is that a real thing?It is this “nothing is ever good enough” mentality that fundamentalist regimes throughout the world and throughout history have used to indoctrinate extremists. Fundamentalist rhetoric is deadly—most of all to people nearest the movement. The sort of progressives and liberals called out in the article will be the first attacked for noncompliance and they will suffer the most if they don’t comply perfectly. No one is allowed to disagree on a single point, even if they agreed with 99% of everything else that was said. Those most indoctrinated have privileged speaking rights, and those who don’t follow the doctrine and dogmas are to be punished first. No part of me is speaking hyperbolically to say we’re dealing with pure fundamentalism.That is to say, unless you agree with literally every notion I’ve demonstrated thus far — you are a racist.If you believe there are problems with critical race theory — you’re a racist.If you believe that America and numerous American institutions don’t systemically oppress black people and other peoples of color — you’re a racist.If you believe that the 1964 Civil Rights Act helped overcome the major legal hurdles blacks and other races face in the United States, and that now we just need time for the system to correct — you’re a racist.If you agree with historic systemic racism, but think today’s inequalities are caused by other things — you’re a racist.If you believe that racism is no longer one of the greatest problems in America — you’re a racist.If you think writing policy, public or private, which corrects fuzzy notions of unprovable happenings in someone’s unconscious are sketchy — you’re a racist.If you disagree with the specific policies being called for, such as abolition of the police — you’re a racist.If you think being on time isn’t racist — you’re a racist.If you haven’t made it clear to everyone in your social spheres that you’re an anti-racist — you’re a racist.If anyone who believes any of the things on this list (racists, in other words), don’t hate you enough — you’re a racist.If you believe that creating a social construct of “whiteness” and stigmatizing it may be kind of racist — you’re a giant racist.If you argue at all — you’re a fragile racist.If you don’t show your support of all of these things loudly enough and often enough, and if you don’t sacrifice yourself enough while publicly shaming and ostracizing your friends, family, and associates whom others have determined are racist — then you too are a racist.I could go on. That’s the issue. “Anti-racism” is fundamentalist rhetoric applied to racism in America. It says that you must agree with all the many flawed narratives surrounding racism, agree with literally any piece of legislation called anti-racist, and never criticize any of them, campaign for policy that isn’t grounded in reality, and do it so loudly as to place your jobs and relationships at risk. If you don’t, you’ll suffer for it, because you’re a racist and that’s what racists deserve.To answer the question fully, the definition of racism remains the same as it always was to most Americans:"a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race."Most people still believe that. But that isn’t the script which the hardliners who control the narrative are using. That group includes many policy-makers, activists, media figures, and most of academia. They are functioning under a different set of assumptions than most of us, and they prize their views to such an extent that questioning them is… well, racist. And they’ll punish us for saying so.So we go along with it. Partly, it’s because commonly understood ideas like racism and their implications can change radically in a single decade. This answer was difficult to write, not just because of everything that went into to, but because of everything left out. Very little of this was talked about ten years ago. Partly, it’s because the systems which perpetuate this rhetoric are so vast and pervasive, and the ideologues are so inured to it, that no amount of reasoning or discussion can make a dent in the ideology. Discussion that isn’t a one-sided lecture is racist to the advocates of these ideas. What hope could there be?But also, it’s because so many of us fear being called racists ourselves. Throughout my life, racism has not been something that has been tolerated, at least not when whites do it. It is a moral evil and frankly, the universal acceptance of that fact is why the extremism I’ve listed is tolerable. The fear of being labelled a racist is so great that people don’t push back against the excess. They don’t say, “No. I’m not a racist. I disagree with racism. Racism is evil. But this stuff you’re saying. It’s wrong and it’s crazy.”Why? Because they’ve seen how their friends who did it before were treated. It’s not worth sticking your neck out to be attacked by a radicalized friend or family member. It’s not worth being ostracized, dogpiled on, bullied, stalked, or harassed online — fired. So little bit by little bit, things get worse. Notice that this era isn’t making things better for blacks either. Prescribing medicines when you’ve failed to diagnose the real disease will only make the patient sicker.So the meaning of racism has changed. The definition may still read the same, but what started off as a description of an attitude is now a weaponized term used to intimidate some, radicalize others, and create far more hatred on all sides.Relaxed. Researched. Respectful. - War ElephantFootnotes[1] Americans Say Blacks More Racist Than Whites, Hispanics, Asians[2] Science's problem with unconscious bias[3] Implicit Bias Gets an Explicit Debunking | National Review[4] Critical theory - Wikipedia