Crimes Against Words: New York Times Announces They’ll Capitalize “Black” – But Not “White”

No area of our existence is safe from this revolution – not even grammar.

Following the example of the Associated Press, The New York Times is going to abandon the rules of grammar to further dehumanize white people by capitalizing the word “black” – but not “white.”

Times editor-in-chief Dean Baquet and associate managing editor for standards Phil Corbett write in their official announcement:

Dear Colleagues,

At The Times and elsewhere, the nationwide protests over racism and police violence have prompted discussions about many aspects of our coverage. One element has been a renewed focus on a longstanding debate: whether to capitalize the term “Black.”

We have talked to more than 100 staff members to get their views, reviewed the arguments that have been made over many years, and consulted with colleagues at other news organizations. The feedback has been thoughtful and nuanced, with a wide range of opinions among colleagues of all backgrounds.

Based on those discussions, we’ve decided to adopt the change and start using uppercase “Black” to describe people and cultures of African origin, both in the United States and elsewhere. We believe this style best conveys elements of shared history and identity, and reflects our goal to be respectful of all the people and communities we cover.

The new style is also consistent with our treatment of many other racial and ethnic terms: We recently decided to capitalize “Native” and “Indigenous,” while other ethnic terms like “Asian-American” and “Latino” have always been capitalized.

We will retain lowercase treatment for “white.” While there is an obvious question of parallelism, there has been no comparable movement toward widespread adoption of a new style for “white,” and there is less of a sense that “white” describes a shared culture and history. Moreover, hate groups and white supremacists have long favored the uppercase style, which in itself is reason to avoid it.


Firstly, as an alleged “white supremacist,” I take issue with capitalizing “white” while not capitalizing “black.” Years ago, the Daily Stormer style guide instructed writers to capitalize both terms as proper nouns, as I wanted to stress the primacy of race in the way that the NYT is talking about doing. Several years ago I changed this and decided to follow the pre-2020 AP guidelines, specifically because capitalizing “black” was something that black supremacists were doing, and I refused to capitalize “white” and not “black.”

I do not think any serious person would ever capitalize one and not the other. “White supremacists” tend to be pro-authoritarian, and those who are pro-authoritarian would not abuse grammar.

As a writer with the basic level of interest in grammar that anyone in my profession must necessarily have, I have the professional opinion that capitalizing both “black” and “white” as proper nouns that identify a culture is fine, and not capitalizing them because they are simply descriptors of physical appearance is fine. There is no possible context in which it is okay to capitalize one and not the other. Saying that they won’t capitalize “white” because “white supremacists” do that is simply bizarre, frankly.

More bizarre, however, is saying that they won’t capitalize it because whites don’t have a culture and blacks do. Aside from this being silly and hateful, it also seems to undermine their entire premise: if they are not fighting against white culture, then what are they fighting against?

I don’t think I should have to even say this, but there is obviously a shared white culture and history. This used to be called “Christendom.” All white people were Christians, historically, and even as some traitors have abandoned our racial religion, we still all share the same underlying cultural assumptions embedded in Christianity (largely taken from Plato in the first place). We also have shared philosophy, music, literature and art traditions, from Los Angeles to Vladivostok. We have a shared tradition of jurisprudence. Although we speak different languages, we even have a shared linguistic history. In fact, every single element that defines culture, in the basic and common terms of sociology, exist across all European peoples. This is simply a matter of factual reality, which has nothing to do with politics, and again, as I understood it, that was what the Jews were attacking, specifically.

When Jews and their minions attack objective truth, they claim that it is a fundamentally white concept. This is surely the concept that is underlying white culture: we have an affinity for understanding reality by using truth. That is what led to the development of science, being the pursuit of objective truth. Our art, religion and social interactions are also fundamentally based on an assumption that truth is valuable in its own right, and this is in some ways the dividing line between us and the Jews.

The blacks, on the other hand, objectively do not have a shared culture in the way that whites do. The entirety of Africa was covered by different groups of blacks, with an unknown number of total separate language groups. They have none of the shared cultural traditions outlined above.

Just compare a person from Africa with an African-American.

The similarity is that they are both gaudy in their fashion. But that is not representative of some kind of unified culture. Other than simply “violence,” it is difficult to see what blacks share between Africa and America.

The point is: this is just tripe. Both “white people have no unified culture” and “black people have a unified culture” are objectively factually incorrect. No one could argue either of these points. If you asked for an explanation for either of these claims, they would have no choice but to simply call you a racist for asking.

The AP didn’t go so far as to give some bizarre fake explanation, instead saying they were still considering it:

As a global news organization, we are continuing to discuss within the U.S. and internationally whether to capitalize the term white. Considerations are many and include any implications that doing so might have outside the United States.

Weird, but much less weird than the NYT’s thing.

It is just a shoddy excuse for putting black people above white people in the structure of the language itself.

They are systematically dehumanizing us. They are just looking for any way to do this.

This anti-white communist revolution is invading all aspects of our existence. It will continue until someone forces them to stop.