The New York Times Magazine has a very long article on Robin DiAngelo, her white fragility hypothesis (and her best-selling book about it), and her methods of training people in government, colleges, and businesses to be anti-racist and promote diversity in the workplace. As the article notes, she's made a ton of money off her hypothesis, but I don't begrudge her that. After all, the Kardashians, who are completely useless, make much more. Rather, I'll focus on the efficacy of her methods and whether her very message is consistent. If you read this site yesterday, you'll have seen a post about John McWhorter's take on DiAngelo's book White Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People to Talk about Racism, a take that was not only highly critical, but accused her methods of fostering a bigotry of low expectations towards African-Americans.
The NYT piece, which is pretty positive, raises some of these questions, but they're examined in depth—and criticized—in a piece by Jonathan Chait in New York Magazine. The two pieces are below; click on screenshot to see the articles.
