When people talk about Joy Reid, Michelle Obama, or Sheila Jackson Lee, the conversation often drifts toward their roles as trailblazing Black women. But what happens if we filter their rise through the lens of thinkers like Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, and John McWhorter? The answers may make some readers uncomfortable, because these three intellectuals have spent decades challenging the very logic behind affirmative action and DEI.
Thomas Sowell would probably look at these women and see a perfect example of what he has warned against. In his studies of affirmative action around the world, he argued that preference programs end up stigmatizing achievement rather than elevating it. To Sowell, the success of Reid, Obama, and Jackson Lee risks being shadowed by suspicion. Were they advanced because of ability or because of a policy that lowers the bar? For him, affirmative action plants a seed of doubt that undermines every credential they hold.
Shelby Steele would strike at something even more personal. He has long argued that affirmative action is a poisoned gift that steals the dignity of genuine achievement. In his eyes, these women represent the politics of white guilt, not the triumph of individual excellence. Steele’s critique would be that Reid, Obama, and Jackson Lee have been pushed forward not because America recognized their talent, but because America wanted to prove its virtue. That proof, he would say, locks Black success inside a victimhood narrative that keeps true agency out of reach.
John McWhorter takes this discussion into the realm of culture and faith. He has described modern antiracism and DEI as a religion, with rituals of confession and virtue signaling. From his view, Reid, Obama, and Jackson Lee play the role of high priests in this secular faith. Their platforms amplify the doctrine that racial identity should always be at the center of American life. McWhorter’s concern is that this “woke religion” does not free Black Americans. Instead, it confines them by insisting that success must always be understood through the lens of grievance.
Put together, the critique is sharp. Sowell sees doubt cast on merit. Steele sees dignity robbed by preference. McWhorter sees a new religion that replaces achievement with ritual. None of them deny the talent or intelligence of these women. But they insist that as long as DEI and affirmative action hover over every success story, Black excellence will never stand on its own terms.
Exposing Charlie Kirk: The Origins of His Views on Race
Since the assassination of Charlie Kirk, videos have been flooding the internet dissecting his views on race. Many African Americans have labeled him a racist and a bigot, often pointing to a handful of soundbites where, at first glance, his words seem to cut down Black people. But here’s the question no one seems to be asking: where did Charlie Kirk actually get his information about the struggles of Black America? In today’s blog, I’m going to pull back the curtain and show you the real source behind his claims. And trust me—the answer just might surprise you.
The Allegations...
After the assassination of Charlie Kirk, the media has been flooded with comments branding him as a racist. Think about this for a moment. The young man spent more than a decade producing thousands of hours of speeches and videos. Yet critics ignore the vast library of his work and instead seize on a handful of clips barely adding up to a minute. Those few seconds, pulled out of context, have been used to build a narrative that he was a racist who somehow deserved what happened to him.
But here is the real question. Has anyone ever stopped to ask why his words struck such a nerve? Has anyone bothered to explore where his ideas actually came from? Charlie was a self-taught learner who consumed hundreds of books and sought wisdom from people he trusted. Among those voices were respected African American leaders. So when he spoke about race, DEI, Joy Reid, Michelle Obama, Ketanji Brown Jackson, or Sheila Jackson Lee, was he simply inventing his own take, or was he reflecting the insights of others?
In this exposé, I will pull back the curtain and reveal the sources behind Charlie Kirk’s words. You may be surprised to discover that much of what he said was not original to him at all, but rather drawn from the arguments, quotes, and perspectives of well-educated Black thinkers who came before him. Click the arrow next to each of Kirk’s point of view to see where it actually came from.
Many critics claim Charlie Kirk was the first to raise alarms about DEI and affirmative action in relation to the credentials of airline pilots. That narrative, however, misses the real origin of the argument. Long before Kirk echoed it, veteran broadcaster Larry Elder had already addressed the issue. In a February episode, Elder stated:
Many of Kirk’s critics insist that his views on affirmative action prove he was racist. But that conclusion overlooks an important reality. Charlie Kirk was a devoted reader and surrounded himself with a circle of prominent Black intellectual voices. He often drew insight from the works of scholars who had already grappled with the very issues he discussed. Among them were Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, and John McWhorter, each of whom produced influential books on race and culture.
Influential Books They Wrote on Race (Click the book title to learn more.)
Thomas Sowell
Affirmative Action Around the World (2004) – A comparative study showing how race-based preferences often backfire across different countries.
Black Rednecks and White Liberals (2005) – A provocative set of essays arguing that culture, not race, explains many group differences.
Shelby Steele
The Content of Our Character (1998) – Explores race relations in America, arguing that victimhood narratives hinder Black progress.
White Guilt (2007) – Examines how America’s attempt to atone for racism created policies that often produce dependency rather than empowerment.
John McWhorter
Losing the Race: Self-Sabotage in Black America (2000) – Argues that defeatist attitudes, victimhood, and separatism limit Black advancement more than racism itself.
Woke Racism: How a New Religion Has Betrayed Black America (2021) – Critiques modern antiracist movements, claiming they function like a harmful new religion that stifles genuine progress.
When people talk about Joy Reid, Michelle Obama, or Sheila Jackson Lee, the conversation often drifts toward their roles as trailblazing Black women. But what happens if we filter their rise through the lens of thinkers like Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, and John McWhorter? The answers may make some readers uncomfortable, because these three intellectuals have spent decades challenging the very logic behind affirmative action and DEI.
Thomas Sowell would probably look at these women and see a perfect example of what he has warned against. In his studies of affirmative action around the world, he argued that preference programs end up stigmatizing achievement rather than elevating it. To Sowell, the success of Reid, Obama, and Jackson Lee risks being shadowed by suspicion. Were they advanced because of ability or because of a policy that lowers the bar? For him, affirmative action plants a seed of doubt that undermines every credential they hold.
Shelby Steele would strike at something even more personal. He has long argued that affirmative action is a poisoned gift that steals the dignity of genuine achievement. In his eyes, these women represent the politics of white guilt, not the triumph of individual excellence. Steele’s critique would be that Reid, Obama, and Jackson Lee have been pushed forward not because America recognized their talent, but because America wanted to prove its virtue. That proof, he would say, locks Black success inside a victimhood narrative that keeps true agency out of reach.
John McWhorter takes this discussion into the realm of culture and faith. He has described modern antiracism and DEI as a religion, with rituals of confession and virtue signaling. From his view, Reid, Obama, and Jackson Lee play the role of high priests in this secular faith. Their platforms amplify the doctrine that racial identity should always be at the center of American life. McWhorter’s concern is that this “woke religion” does not free Black Americans. Instead, it confines them by insisting that success must always be understood through the lens of grievance.
Put together, the critique is sharp. Sowell sees doubt cast on merit. Steele sees dignity robbed by preference. McWhorter sees a new religion that replaces achievement with ritual. None of them deny the talent or intelligence of these women. But they insist that as long as DEI and affirmative action hover over every success story, Black excellence will never stand on its own terms.
So why shoot the messenger? The truth is that these views did not originate with him. They came from voices that have been speaking for decades: Larry Elder, Herman Cain, Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, and John McWhorter. Each of these individuals carved out their own path in the world of ideas, often at great personal cost, and each offered arguments that challenged the popular narratives about race, justice, and equality in America.
Think about what that means. If Charlie Kirk echoes their words, then the outrage is not really directed at him. It is directed at a tradition of Black intellectual thought that refuses to bow to the politics of victimhood. Elder spoke unapologetically about responsibility and freedom. Cain lived out the belief that hard work and courage could propel anyone forward. Sowell dismantled the myths behind affirmative action with cold data. Steele exposed the paralyzing effect of white guilt. McWhorter warned against turning antiracism into a religion.
To dismiss Kirk without engaging these deeper sources is to avoid the real debate. It is easier to attack the young man with the microphone than to wrestle with the uncomfortable questions raised by Black leaders and thinkers who came before him. But avoiding the argument does not make it go away. Their ideas are still here, written in books, spoken in lectures, and lived out in lives of consequence.
So the question is not whether Charlie Kirk is offensive. The real question is whether America is willing to engage the substance of these ideas, no matter how unsettling they may feel.
What are your thoughts?
Additional Videos:
“It’s Not a Race Problem” – The Real Reason Black People Are Struggling
Debunking Systemic Racism & Having Common Decency (Pt. 2) | Thomas Sowell
Thomas Sowell – Affirmative Action
Thomas Sowell Warning about DEI
Share this:
Like this:
Related
Recent Posts
Why Siri, Alexa, and AI Don’t Sound Black?
Read More »Cualquier relación que te aleje de Dios no proviene de Dios
Read More »Cómo identificar una buena iglesia
Read More »Support DoctorUsher.com
If you would like to support the content this ministry provides to the community, please consider making a donation or becoming monthly partner! All donations are confidential and tax deductible.