Scroll down to read this post.


Please consider supporting my work, as I take no advertisements nor accept any sponsors in order to keep the website clean, easy to read, and to avoid any accusations of conflict of interest. Your support leaves me entirely independent, able to say whatever I think while being free from censorship or reprisals.


You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are five ways of doing so:


1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.


2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.

3. A Paypal Donation:

4. A Paypal subscription:

5. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652

Pushback: Former employee sues Smith College for discrimination and harassment because she is white

No civil rights allowed for whites at Smith College
No civil rights allowed for whites at Smith College

Fighting back against bigotry: Jodi Shaw, a former librarian at Smith College in Massachusetts, has sued the college for discriminating against her because she was white, and harassing her by forcing her to attend critical race theory indoctrination sessions that demanded she admit to racism and the evils of the white race.

While she worked there, Shaw “was denied a significant professional career advancement opportunity when she was told by her supervisors that they canceled an orientation program she organized ‘because you are white.’” She was also expected to run a “Residential Life Curriculum” in which students were directed “to project stereotypes and assumptions onto themselves and others based on skin color.” The college asked Shaw to maintain “affinity houses,” which consisted of student housing segregated along racial lines.

During a professional development retreat at which attendance was compulsory, Shaw “was publicly humiliated for not admitting to ‘white supremacy’ and ‘white privilege’ and was continually expected to submit to shaming and harassing group race therapy as an ongoing condition of employment.”

The college harassed her, Shaw claims in the complaint. When she objected to the offending policies and the racially hostile environment at Smith College, the “defendants retaliated against her, attempted to stymie her efforts to file an internal complaint, and then hedged and delayed their investigation. Defendants steadily removed Plaintiff’s job responsibilities, denied her promotional opportunities consistent with all of her colleagues, placed her on furlough, launched a pretextual investigation into her email usage, and deliberately made any further employment at Smith College impossible for Shaw.”

You can read the full complaint here [pdf]. It outlines in detail the incident that prompted Smith College to institute its Jim Crow mandates against whites. Apparently, a black student, Oumou Kanoute, made patently false accusations of racism against three college employees, a white janitor, a white cafeteria worker, and a security guard. Kanoute also doxxed the two white employees, subjecting them to threatening phone calls and demonstrations. The subsequent uproar forced that janitor to leave his job, subjected the cafeteria worker to years of public ridicule, abuse, and verbal threats, and caused the security guard to be removed from duty.

Apparently the college first accepted the accusations blindly, allowing these employees to be slandered, and only later quietly exonerated them when the facts showed it was Kanoute who was lying.

And despite that exoneration showing no acts of racism had occurred, Smith College still went ahead and instituted its program of critical race theory indoctrination for all its employees that specifically condemned all whites as evil and imposed discriminatory policies against whites. The atmosphere created by these actions made working at the college intolerable for Shaw. After she was placed on administrative leave she decided to resign.

She also decided to sue. Based on the facts in the complaint, she should win. The college clearly violated numerous civil rights and anti-harassment laws, as well as its own policies regarding employee treatment. Whether she will win remains unclear in these intolerant times. The courts are no longer reliable in defending the law as written, and often — like the corrupt legal system that protected the Democratic Party and its white leadership in the South during the Jim Crow era — works to protect the power structure now controlled by leftists and black militants.

Kudos however to Shaw for fighting. More people need to do this. They have the law as written on their side. Sooner or later the weight of those words will win out, if enough demand it.

Genesis cover

On Christmas Eve 1968 three Americans became the first humans to visit another world. What they did to celebrate was unexpected and profound, and will be remembered throughout all human history. Genesis: the Story of Apollo 8, Robert Zimmerman's classic history of humanity's first journey to another world, tells that story, and it is now available as both an ebook and an audiobook, both with a foreword by Valerie Anders and a new introduction by Robert Zimmerman.

The ebook is available everywhere for $5.99 (before discount) at amazon, or direct from my ebook publisher, ebookit. If you buy it from ebookit you don't support the big tech companies and the author gets a bigger cut much sooner.

The audiobook is also available at all these vendors, and is also free with a 30-day trial membership to Audible.

"Not simply about one mission, [Genesis] is also the history of America's quest for the moon... Zimmerman has done a masterful job of tying disparate events together into a solid account of one of America's greatest human triumphs."--San Antonio Express-News


  • BtB’s Original Mark

    Bob, I noticed that this article does not have a hyperlink to an originating article like your series ‘They’re coming for you next’ (that hyperlink went back to 2018).
    Maybe we can call this new series ‘Reboot & Push Back!’, and hopefully in our future there is more ‘Pushback’ than ‘They’re coming for you next’.

    Here is a one minute clip from a British movie about Brexit, which covers the political campaign of push back against British elites in order for the UK to exit the European Union.

    The UK Brexit promoter Dominic Cummings stated:
    ‘We have to hack the system…This is the new politics now…Let’s take back our Country…..’

    Ludzie nie powinni bać się swojego rządu. Rządy powinny bać się swoich ludzi.

  • Original Mark: This pushback post, as well as all the blacklist posts, are part of the same series. Look in the right column (desktop) or at the bottom of the page (phone) for the box titled “Blacklisted Americans.” You can see them all if you click on the works “Full list.”

  • BtB’s Original Mark

    Thanks for the site navigation directions.

  • Cotour


    Four year olds in Scotland are able to choose their gender, and their parents have nothing to say about it!?

    Now THAT! Is madness.

    Complements of the Loony, Asinine, Jr. Nazi like Left.

    Do they even understand that they are Jr. Nazi’s, soon to graduate into being full blood Nazi’s? Detention camps and all?

    Yes, but they do not care, they are the Loony, Asinine Jr. Nazi Left.

    This may well only come to one potential eventuality, us or them.

  • Questioner


    Thanks, this is an interesting channel. A question for you One thing I don’t understand: In September 1939 there was also the Soviet invasion of Poland! The Russians took half of the country. Then why didn’t England and France declare war on the Soviet Union as they did on Germany? That would have been logical and imperative.

  • wayne

    From Poland to the Invasion of the Soviet Union (Sep 1939-Jun 1941)

  • Questioner

    Wayne: I would prefer to get your own opinion on this extremely important historical issue that is officially being kind of avoided.

  • BtB’s Original Mark

    Wayne – I have just completed another YT Task from the BtB LinkMaster. VDH is our great Sachem of Non-woke History.
    I’ll repeat here my previous link:

    We have to hack the system…This is the new politics now…Let’s take back our Country…..

    And here’s a chilling question – Is the Conservative belief in the Bill of Rights the Maginot Line in the Global Elites’s War on Conservative America?

    Semper Fi

  • wayne

    can’t speak for the English.
    As VDH notes, the English went to war on principle and treaty obligations. Not sure what would have been served by England declaring war on the soviet union.
    As for France, WW-1 blew their minds, and they weren’t going to do that ever again, so while they had adequate men & material, they lacked the will to fight.

  • BLSinSC

    “Affirmative action” has been discriminating against white people since it was enacted! It was unConstitutional then as now! Giving PREFERENCE for being a certain color or body type can only be practiced by DISCRIMINATING against those without that color or body! It’s RACIST and SEXIST no matter whether there is a “law” that enables it! People should be judge on their ABILITIES rather than melanin or vaginaism levels! (I made up that term). The left has taken RACISM to another ATMOSPHERIC level in their crazed program to rule the world! I think their plan is to put mostly blacks in positions knowing that they can CONTROL them! All this “white privilege” and “white guilt” is useful to identify the terminally ignorant white folk who can be ignored for the time being!

  • Questioner


    The purpose of the Polish assistance treaty with England, the wording of which I unfortunately do not know, was certainly to preserve Poland and the then Polish state. Why should England (in this context) accept the Soviet aggressor who took half Poland but not the German aggressor? Somehow doesn’t make sense. Maybe England wasn’t interested in Poland’s fate at all?

  • Questioner: The main reason I think Great Britain declared war only on Germany is that Germany had been a repeated breaker of treaties and a repeated aggressor, grabbing the Rhineland, Austria and Czechoslakia, all after promising loudly they would not. Germany was thus a threat to everyone and needed to be stopped.

    The Soviet Union, though clearly no saint as it had signed a secret non-aggression treaty with Germany that also included this Polish invasion, dividing that country up between them, had not been such an aggressor. Stalin’s motives at that time was to buy security for his country by making Germany an ally while also gaining a buffer region between it and Russia.

    Of course, Stalin paid for this deal with the devil, when Hitler and Germany broke this treaty as well, invading Russia.

  • Questioner

    Mr Z:

    Thanks for your answer, which doesn’t sound unreasonable. I don’t want to go directly into the Polish question now, otherwise there will be an endless discussion. But one thing has to be said from my point of view: none of this can be meaningfully analyzed without considering the First World War and its aftermath, a war in which blame is not as easy to assign as in the Second. Then it must also be said that there is never just one side in geopolitical contexts, that is just good and bad or black and white. England’s interests and behavior can be just as worthy of criticism as those of other countries. Almost every view has its own justification, including Germany’s attempt to at least partially reverse or mitigate what it sees as the grossly unjust outcome of World War I. Moral questions don’t really play a role in the power struggle between states, they only serve as a pretext. This also applies to England and America.

  • Questioner wrote: “Moral questions don’t really play a role in the power struggle between states, they only serve as a pretext.”

    Utter garbage, especially when it comes to World War II. Germany was an aggressor, led by a meglomaniac that the public in its naivety and ignorance had allowed to come to power. It was a nation practicing genocide not only against its own citizens (Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, political opponents), it entered both Poland and Russia with the intended goal, clearly stated by Hitler in his orders to his generals, to allow the local populations to starve and die in order to clear that land for the Germans to occupy.

    Everyone knew these facts. Both Russia and Great Britain were desperately fighting to survive against the German onslaught. Had the U.S. not joined in it is very questionable either would have. And if Germany had won in both places millions more would have been sent to the gas chambers by the Nazis.

    The U.S. joined the war because it understood these facts, and the moral imperatives those facts brought out. To think moral questions were not a factor in World War II is to put blinders on.

    Moreover, that in your comments here you always wish to ignore these ugly facts about mid-20th century Germany, and try to ascribe blame to others when in comes to World War II, is quite shameful. That you are German and do this is even more shameful. It suggests things about you personally that you might want to reflect upon.

  • BtB’s Original Mark

    Mr. Z. – this discussion of a fascist regime that was utterly destroyed over 75 years ago reminded me that you cover Chinese launches on in a nearly weekly basis.
    Can you use your platform to highlight the monstrous nature of the Chinese Regime that you report on?
    Perhaps after describing a Chinese launch you can finish with:

    For more information on the conventional, ideological, and existential threats emanating from the CCP, check out the website of the Committee on the Present Danger: China.

    After reading your response to Questioner, I think you’d agree that is the moral thing to do.

  • Max

    I would point out that the shifting alliances in World War II left many nations afraid to act for being on the wrong side.
    Or in the case of France, who disarmed after the great war, was woefully ill prepared for an attack from Germany. The resistance lasted two weeks before France fell, and the occupation began.

    Poland was still using Calvary troops against mechanized infantry… They were massacred.

    Because of the triple alliance, a declaration of war on Germany is a declaration of war against Italy and Japan as well. That would have included Russia also, had the agreement been known before Germany broke it and attacked Russia, a big mistake. But a bigger mistake was made by Stalin, massacring his own red guard.

    The question was asked;
    The Russians took half of the country. Then why didn’t England and France declare war on the Soviet Union as they did on Germany?

    France was occupied, England pinned down. It is the responsibility of the nation being invaded to defend it’s self, the best they can. They will pay the price after all, if they do not.
    In the end, millions died in the great war and the world was forever changed. Some nations no longer existed but Poland survived. It’s occupation by Russia was not nearly as brutal as East Germany’s occupation. Nevertheless, the only thing that could be done about Russia was the creation of the NATO alliance to prevent further hostilities. But the boomer generation survived the Cold War, I hope we survive what’s coming next…

    United States had trade agreements with most of Europe including Germany before Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, bringing us into the fray.
    Hitler was not happy with Japan but what was done, was done! and the sleeping giant was awakened.
    My father-in-law was a tank commander sent to Japan, but the fleet was delayed by a typhoon which destroyed more ships than Japanese submarines.
    By the time they got there, atomic weapons were used, and he was part of the occupation.

    The only death he witnessed was women throwing their children off the cliffs as the ships entered the harbor, before jumping to their death themselves. Mass psychosis driven by priests of the goddess is a powerful thing.

    Japanese showed very little mercy in their occupation of China, were millions starved.

    US occupation of Japan was not what they expected, it changed their entire national identity. Being treated with respect and dignity added shame to their souls. My aunt Saki said, that Shame would not leave until the last of the World War II generation was gone. (she lived in American detention camp as a little girl)

    My uncle Aslami from Afghanistan would tell me that the US occupation was a wonderful thing! His relatives there had never known peace… All children were raised knowing only fear…
    Something his own father tried to avoid by sending him to United States for his education, like all his brothers and sisters. (his father lived and died working for the Russians as a Afghan general)
    Has one generation been enough peacekeeping (not war) (protecting the Poppyfields?) to allow the population to evolve into a modern culture? We will soon find out.

  • wayne

    ref- France; they may have “down-armed” after ww-1, but I would quibble with ‘dis-armed.’ Their tanks, IIRC, were equal / superior to german tanks, and again I would put forth the proposition- leadership lacked the Will to Resist germany.

    As for the United States– we formally declared war on Japan on December 8, 1941. Germany then declared war on the US and we in turn formally declared war on them December 11, 1941. [the House adopted the war resolution on Germany 393–0, while the Senate voted 88–0.]
    Britain in the 20th Century: “Appeasement” –
    Professor Vernon Bogdanor
    Gresham College Public Lecture (2011)
    (This is a multi-part series covering Britain in the 20th century.)

  • Questioner


    America’s road to empire is paved by a seemingly endless series of conflicts and wars in which this state has been involved, see list.
    Of course, all were only fought for the highest moral reasons and to “free” the enemy.

    “List of wars involving the United States”

  • wayne

    what, is your point?
    You Europeans have been killing each other, for thousands of years.

    Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain
    “What we’re fighting for”

  • Col Beausabre

    “During a professional development retreat at which attendance was compulsory, Shaw “was publicly humiliated for not admitting to ‘white supremacy’ and ‘white privilege’ and was continually expected to submit to shaming and harassing group race therapy as an ongoing condition of employment.”

    Maoist “Self Criticism Sessions” right out of the “Cultural Revolution”:

    Self-criticism (Marxism–Leninism) – Wikipedia

  • Questioner

    Mr Z:

    I have one more question for you in connection with the Polish question, which we recently discussed.

    At that time England had contractually committed itself to guaranteeing the territorial unity of Poland. I’m sure that the Poles wanted back also exactly that half of their country that was annexed by the Soviet Union, and not just the half occupied by Germany. Why was this demand not officially addressed to the Soviet Union first by England and later by the Allies?

    How do you mean?

    What do you mean?

  • Questioner: Your question about the postwar division of Poland has been addressed endlessly by many historians. You need to read some real history by people like Churchill, Eisenhower, Shirer, Truman, and others, who lived at that time and were directly involved in the negotiations. Churchill fought throughout the war to honor the UK’s treaty with Poland, but in the end the decision was made by the U.S. and the Soviet Union, mostly by the Soviet Union. Whatever they captured they were going to control, in one way or the other, and the west was going to have to commit to another world war to stop them. After the terrors and miseries of the last six years, no one wanted to do that.

    Note too that Churchill was voted out of power mere months after the end of the war, and was no longer in a position to influence Stalin. His labor party replacement, like Roosevelt, was naive about the Soviets, and willing to give them more than they would have gotten with Churchill. Truman meanwhile was too new to the game to really understand the dynamics. He learned quickly however, and within a year was a major instigator of the Cold War designed to halt Soviet aggression.

    That Cold War against the Soviet Union lasted almost a half century before it finally forced the collapse of that tyranny and its retreat from Eastern Europe.

  • Questioner


    This is a quite interesting analysis.

    “Why Hitler is Everywhere – Wisecrack Edition”

Readers: the rules for commenting!


No registration is required. I welcome all opinions, even those that strongly criticize my commentary.


However, name-calling and obscenities will not be tolerated. First time offenders who are new to the site will be warned. Second time offenders or first time offenders who have been here awhile will be suspended for a week. After that, I will ban you. Period.


Note also that first time commenters as well as any comment with more than one link will be placed in moderation for my approval. Be patient, I will get to it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *