Antiwhite Whites. By David Cole.

Meet Chicago Democrat Party official … Mary Lemanski.

Mary Lemanski, 46, income ~$80k, net worth ~$5 million.

On the evening of Nov. 21, following the mass murders at the Waukesha Christmas parade, … Lemanski, social media director for the DuPage County Democrat Party, went on a Twitter diatribe about how the victims “reaped what they sowed” because of “collective karma” following the Rittenhouse verdict.

“The blood of Kyle Rittenhouse’s victims is on the hands of Wisconsin citizens, even the children.”

Lemanski repeatedly claimed that the “white” Waukesha victims got what they deserved …

I followed the Lemanski freak show because I found her honesty refreshing. She didn’t hesitate to openly admit her hatred of her fellow whites, which, she tweeted, came from childhood experiences:

I was sexually abused at age 2, a victim of white racists against Polish people from age 1-7, lost my virginity to a rapist at age 14, had an abusive mother. I had serious issues because of white racism. …

Look at how the Democrat Party reacted to her blatant racism:

It’s intriguing how quickly the non-rightist media “pounced” on Lemanski. She was by no means a major national figure. A party official, sure, and fair game because of it. But the left-leaning press seemed to pile on with atypical vigor.

Why?

Well, Lemanski revealed the secret handshake. She dared to explicitly mention her antiwhite bias. She didn’t cloak it in academic gibberish like “equity.” She made it clear that she’s driven by a hatred of white people.

She gave the game away. Democrats traffic in antiwhite hatred, but they can never openly admit it. So when one of them does, out they go, to preserve the illusion that the “hater” was an anomaly. …

For blacks, some anti-white hatred makes economic sense:

There’s no mystery to that motivation. In employment, academia, and just generally in life, there’s a black advantage to be had by keeping whites down, out, and cowed.

Lemanski has a personal beef, but what about other whites?

Sometimes the answer is simple opportunism. There’s money in antiwhiteness.

But not at ground level; opportunism doesn’t explain whites voting against their best interests or pushing CRT on white children. What does is that white adherents of wokeism are the same people susceptible to what’s known as (and man I hate this term) “woo-woo,” defined by The Spectator’s Leah McLaren as “anything slightly silly, trendy and/or new agey that exists for the primary purpose of making people (almost always privileged white women) feel better about our bodies and minds.” … Instead of blaming it all on mommy and daddy, the new Freudians blame it all on whitey …

What’s missing from the manure mountain of antiwhite books, essays, and lectures stinking up the discourse these days is a comprehensive study of the motivations of those who are attracted to this kind of “woo-woo.” …

With a single-celled organism like Mary Lemanski, it’s easy to explain why she’s drawn to antiwhiteness. But those school-board hags and CRT pushers in the classrooms, and all the college-educated whites who continue to vote for this nonsense…what’s their deal?

By blanketing the marketplace with antiwhite content, that alone will birth believers among the impressionable. We see that happening with teens (who are by definition feebleminded) and trannyism. The 24/7 pro-tranny noise in media and advertising, combined with an outright ban on opposing views, is “creating” trannies.

1960s wannabees, legends in their own classrooms:

With educators, though (and they’re the primary drivers of CRT), there’s likely something more specific at play. Many of these people are of an age where they remember the campus protests of the 1960s and early ’70s, either as participants or (like me) as kids watching the events on TV and being told that they were the greatest things ever. And what we’re seeing is a desire on the part of people like that to relive (or live anew) those “glory days.”

They’ve imagined themselves back in time. Or rather, they’ve imagined the past into the present. It’s a historical phantom pregnancy, like the leftists who are convinced it’s still the 1950s, with the KKK lynching blacks, racist cops murdering blacks for no reason, and “freedom riders” braving the odds to register the disenfranchised darkies to vote.

And now nostalgic, leftist educators are in a virtual reality of their own wishful thinking in which massive student revolts are compelling them to step in and save the day with CRT. …

Except of course that’s not happening. The campus protests of the ’60s and ’70s for “black studies” and “Chicano studies” departments are not being replicated for CRT. That’s all in the white educators’ minds. Blacks are protesting, but not for CRT. Their walkouts have nothing to do with curricula at all. They protest cops, they protest Halloween costumes, they protest the free speech of white professors.

But the self-absorbed woke educators — narcissists who live in obscurity and fear dying in it — need to make it all about themselves. “These struggling students of color need me. I must lead them! CRT now, CRT forever! I’m a hero!”

So, much of it comes back to virtue signalling and moral vanity. My shocked face just got another workout.