Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

VIDEO: Penn State Prof Singles Out White Student to Demonstrate White Privilege

VIDEO: Penn State Prof Singles Out White Student to Demonstrate White Privilege

“Russell has a benefit of having white skin”

This is maddening to watch. How many parents know that this is what their tuition dollars are funding?

The Blaze reports:

Professor makes ‘average white’ student stand up in lecture, explains he has inherent ‘benefit’ over black student no ‘matter what he does’

A professor at Penn State University recently made an “average white” student stand up in front of a 700-person lecture hall and explained that he has an inherent “benefit” over any black student, regardless of his behavior.

What happened?

Dr. Sam Richards, a popular sociology professor at the Pennsylvania school, was attempting to demonstrate the effects of systemic racism last month when he executed the unusual classroom illustration.

“I just take the average white guy in class, whoever it is, it doesn’t really matter,” Richards said as he approached a section of students.

“Dude, this guy here. Stand up, bro. What’s your name, bro?” the professor then asked telling a student named Russell to stand up and face the class.

“Look at Russell, right here, it doesn’t matter what he does,” Richards continued. “If I match him up with a black guy in class, or a brown guy, even … who’s just like him, has the same GPA, looks like him, walks like him, talks like him, acts in a similar way, has been involved in the same groups on campus, takes the same leadership positions, whatever it is … and we send them into the same jobs … Russell has a benefit of having white skin.”

See the videos below:

Featured image via YouTube.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Sociology professors. Creating a hostile educational environment since 1830. (or so)

there are many empty gibbets available for immediate occupancy

The Friendly Grizzly | July 13, 2021 at 1:55 pm

I wonder what the esteemed professor’s reaction would be had the white student told the prof to shine his shoes?

“Dude, this guy here. Stand up, bro. What’s your name, bro?”

First thing I would have said was, “My name ain’t ‘bro.'”

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to alohahola. | July 13, 2021 at 7:35 pm

    I was at some shope recently where the salesman addressed me as “my brother”. A) he was not black. B) I am not black. C) He wasn’t even a fellow furface.

    I corrected him, politely but firmly.

nordic_prince | July 13, 2021 at 5:14 pm

“Critical Race Theory” as pedagogy doesn’t belong in ANY classroom, whether K-12 OR post-secondary.

henrybowman | July 13, 2021 at 6:06 pm

“Look at Russell, right here, it doesn’t matter what he does … Russell has a benefit of having white skin.”

I so badly want to see this prof lose his position to a diversity hire.

Okay. Let’s say I have “white privilege.”

“Privilege” does not exist ex nihilo. It had to start somewhere with some people at some point in history.

I have no problem with others admitting to the world that my ancestors were more apt, more intelligent, more able, more sophisticated, and much more likely to come out on the winning side of any conflict with their ancestors. If they want to take it back 50 years, 500 years or 5,000 years I am up for that. The better team apparently won the privilege game and took home the trophy. The 2nd place team took home — well — 2nd place.

If they say the game was rigged, then my ancestors were smarter than theirs and figured out how to rig the game and theirs didn’t. If they say my ancestors were more savage than theirs then that means theirs were weaker than mine. If they say there were more of mine, then that means that mine were simply better at understanding how to use the environment and technology to sustain a greater population. If they say that my ancestors were better geographically situated that means that they were better realtors, able to find and hold superior territory. If they say my ancestors had bigger, badder, and more destructive weapons that means than their ancestors were probably stuck in a stone-age existence for 10,000 years past their time.

No matter how you slice it… they are making the claim for me that their ancestors could not quite hack it when it came to competition for the “privilege” of being on top. They were weaker, ineffective, and overall a fine example of Darwinism in action. Seems to me as if they are pointing the “finger of blame” at the wrong set of ancestors. I’d suggest they have a heartfelt talk with their grandma and grandpa and ask them why ~their~ grandmas and grandpas were so pitiful in the game of life.

Now understand that ~this~ is how ~they~ see the world. This is what ~they~ are admitting happened. Unless, of course, they want to somehow claim that “privilege” just happened along one day from out of nowhere and someone picked it up off the ground and has been using it ever since. Should be an interesting and amusing read.

    Antifundamentalist in reply to jack burton. | July 14, 2021 at 4:05 pm

    Now there is a movement to remove and undermine the accomplishments of those that came before in this new age of being Woke. The question is, who is going to win this fight in this day and age? Given what is happening and how, ultimately, fight there will have to be.

      Antifundamentalist in reply to Antifundamentalist. | July 14, 2021 at 4:07 pm

      Just to be clear, it isn’t white vs people of color either, though that isn’t how it is being framed by the would-be overlords. It is a fight for the future and freedom of thinking people, whatever their skin color.