The Specter of White Supremacy in the California Community Colleges

A racialist worldview is destroying the nation’s largest higher education system

There is no clearer evidence than the June 29, 2023, webinar presented by Colegas—an organization sponsored by the California Community Colleges (CCC) system—that the specter of white supremacy has transformed diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) into an insidious and unassailable ideology.

The Colegas email promoting the webinar, “Equitable Counseling and Social Justice,” stated that “Our institutions and organizations are systematically infused with White supremacist bias” and that “… we also recognize the biased forces, beliefs and values deeply embedded within our structures, practices and ourselves. These barriers hinder equitable access, delay success, and prevent inclusion in foundational quality education.”

Purveyors of this sophistry have been emboldened by the new, legally binding DEI directives that were adopted in the California Code of Regulations—which are labeled “obligations” and include “competencies” and “criteria” related to hiring, evaluation, and promotion—providing the CCC system a justification for demanding loyalty and allegiance to this destructive ideology.

This vision of the world is an illusion. It is never explained through empirical evidence or defended by means of academic discussion and debate. Rather, it is forcefully asserted that every disparate outcome between racial or ethnic groups supports a binary, oppressor-versus-oppressed view of reality.

This vision of the world is impervious to counterclaims because its adherents and their allies use institutional power and oppressor-versus-oppressed rhetoric to silence opposing voices, especially voices that support equality and a colorblind ethic. The narrative is controlled through the tens of millions of taxpayer dollars funneled through the CCC Chancellor’s Office.

[Related: “Unmasking the DEI Paradox”]

This vision of the world makes the CCC system an overtly political institution, one which is thoroughly warped by its fictional, yet dangerous, dogma that demonizes Western society and white people. The constant refrain that “white supremacist bias” is the singular cause of poor student outcomes engenders toxic polarization. It’s a claim that cannot be proven and an impossible benchmark that a myriad of interventions can never overcome.

This vision of the world believes that it is immoral not to be partisan. Institutional neutrality is a thing of the past in the CCC system, and in order to justify this partisanship, institutional neutrality itself must be construed as a construct of Eurocentric power and control. Virtually everything that system leaders do is in the name of DEI.

This vision of the world sees white people and their practices, systems, and structures as harmful. The ideal of true equality, evidenced by decades of demonstrable cultural and educational progress, is inverted in favor of equity, the practice of making all outcomes equal by means of educational affirmative action in all but name—despite the defeat of Proposition 16 (2020), which would have repealed Proposition 209 (1996), the constitutional amendment that effectively banned affirmative action in California.

This vision of the world will inevitably negate the stellar, student-centered, teaching-rich mission of the CCC system as described in the California Master Plan for Higher Education over sixty years ago. It will fundamentally alter curriculum, pedagogy, and hiring practices through nonstop DEI indoctrination based on the most radical critical social justice scholarship, which I would define as a postmodern, critical theology.

Leaders at all levels of the California Community Colleges are now openly promoting the belief that a pervasive, racist hegemony is a feature, not a bug, that controls the “systemic structures” across the system’s 116 schools. They demonize anyone who is not a person of color or an “ally,” seek to dismantle long-standing and effective institutional processes, upend traditional notions of equality à la Martin Luther King’s colorblind ethic, and use newly defined DEI as a blunt force to enact social and institutional mayhem.

To be sure, the outlook is bleak, and the solutions are few. For starters, we must be as professionally antagonistic as possible toward DEI while publicly calling for the destruction of its systems and structures, on the ground that they perpetuate what we should call “antiracist supremacist bias.” We need courage to articulately critique DEI in our department and committee meetings while also arguing for the universal, cross-cultural values of equality, fairness, and meritocracy.

Image: Adobe Stock


  • Ray M. Sanchez

    Ray M. Sanchez is Faculty Coordinator of Academic Success Centers at Madera Community College in Madera, California. He has a M.A. in History from CSU, Fresno. He may be contacted at

    View all posts

9 thoughts on “The Specter of White Supremacy in the California Community Colleges

  1. Oh, can’t post comments proving how stupid you are and showing that you are a Racist idiot and want to go back to 1950 with segregation because YOU ignore the benchmarks that are clear as day.
    How dare we care about progress for all. Not just one race that has had systemic racism in it since before you or I was born. Take a history class.
    The fact your Faculty Coordinator is appalling.

    1. Wow, someone is so twiggad by the truth, and why don’t you put your real name instead of using Ray’s?

    2. This is disturbing.

      All my life I have been treated as a second class citizen, first because I was Protestant, then because I was male, and now because I am White. Yes, the Klan has approached me, and I’m going to quote verbatim what one recruiter said to me:

      The first job is going to go to the woman or minority.
      The second job will go to the son-in-law.
      You might have a chance at the third job…
      ….Except that there’s not going to be three jobs.

      My response is unprintable, but I can see a lot of White males making the leap from the truth of the above to seeing the Klan (and similar groups) as being their only means of advancement.

      And then along comes a racist schmuck like the one above and I am forced to wonder why I even try.

      For pure self interest, if I am forced to chose between 1953 and 2023, I’d have to chose 1953 because at least then, I had a chance of making something of myself. At least then, people who looked like me weren’t excluded from advancement.

      Ever since Bakke in 1978, I held out hope that — sooner or later — the US Supreme Court would say that the Civil Rights Act meant what it said, that the “thou shalt not discriminate” would actually mean that I would no longer be discriminated against. That we would all benefit from the legacy of Dr. King’s Dream.

      What we see in the diatribe above is the shattering of the dream — *my* dream as well. This crap is not going to end, and I fear for the future of the Republic because while I’m not joining the Klan (trust me), I hear its siren song to what are now three generations of underemployed White males. If the schmuck wants to talk history, then let’s talk history starting with the American Revolution which was more of a civil war than anything else, an economic civil war between those with hard currency because of their association with the British, and those without.

      Then he/she/it may wish to look at the “Know Nothing” movement and the Blaine Amendments but that would take some actual scholarship, not to mention an independent perspective. He might want to look at the rise of the Klan in the 1920s — the infamous “Klanbake” convention in NYC and the various marches on DC. (The footage of the latter is on Youtube and its actually freaky to watch because none of the buildings you expect to see have been built yet, it’s a lot of open fields with a few recognizable buildings.)

      Populism can be quite ugly, and 50 years of Affirmative Retribution has built a wave of populism greater than this country has ever seen before. Comments like the above make me truly fear for the future of the Republic.

      1. I don’t fear for the future of the Republic. It’s probably gone, and why would I take that personally? If America’s doing this sort of thing, the productive will tend to withdraw their efforts and reposition elsewhere, or find enclaves where they don’t get cheated.

        It’s been like this in increasing measure since the 1980’s, but now I think there’s enough consciousness of how we’re being gypped that the left has to come out guns blazing. At least we can fight now, and there’s awareness on our side. We won’t be slaves.

    3. “The fact your [sic] Faculty Coordinator is appalling.”

      Maybe YOU should take a spellling/grammer class…

  2. Yea, because white people with Western ideas did not overtake an entire country and wipe a race of people off this earth? People like you are what is wrong with this world You must agree with what Russia is doing in Ukraine, killing innocent people, just as our forefathers did to Native Americans. Or should we talk about the Civil War that is still praised by a racist South to this day? Are those not benchmarks of where systemic racism started? But please explain how 100s of years of slavery and getting paid the least amount, segregation away from items and places is supposed to assist those people today. Would you like numbers that show how successful 2nd generation students are compared to their counterparts of first generation. Again please explain how you to get a 2nd gen student in college when you have had 100s of years of not allowing even the 1st gen to go due to the above. Again these are benchmarks numbnuts you just refuse to look at them.
    So yes there are white supremacy within California Community Colleges we are looking at one of them named Ray M Sanchez.
    If your going writing and article at least research it and do better.

    1. Well, I did take a look at history and couldn’t find any evidence of what you claim. Exactly which race of people are now extinct because of white people with western ideas?

    2. I hate to confuse you with the facts, but Sanchez is a HISPANIC name that is common throughout Mexico and Latin America. So, technically,he’s not even White to begin with, and wouldn’t being White be a prerequisite to being a White Supremicist?!?

      Or is a “White Supremicist” anyone who disagrees with your Marxist agenda?

      Answer this honestly, and preferably without the stolen name of another.
      (Why is the NAS permitting this schmuck to steal the name of the author?)

  3. I will say again: A 76% illegitimacy rate is not good for children.

    That said, I am reminded of the debate around welfare reform back in the 1990s.

    The NAACP pointed out, correctly, that there were more White families on welfare than there were Black families. While a higher percentage of Black families were on welfare, a far smaller percentage of a much larger White population created a headcount that exceeded the entire Black population.

    At least nationally, and with the caveat that California may be different, if we were to seriously expand access to higher education, the numerically largest group of beneficiaries (headcount*) would be low income White males. If we do any racially neutral outreach, the largest headcount will be White males. If we address remediation for stuff not learned in K-12, the largest headcount will be White males. If we make it “free” to those below a certain income level, again, the largest headcount will be White males.

    It’s simple demographics.

    While there are no statistics breaking this down on income, female college students now outnumber male students by an almost 2:1 ratio — hence on a statistical basis, the underserved population is male.

    And there are more White families living in poverty than there are Black families — hence any racially-neutral outreach to the poor will overwhelmingly benefit Whites.

    Hence the mission of the community college, at least nationally, ought to be on helping White males — not demonizing them.

    If higher education has value, if providing access to higher education to all is a legitimate social good and goal, if we want to concentrate our efforts on underserved populations and all the rest — all lofty goals that I’ve heard the profession proclaim more times than I can remember — then the profession needs to concentrate on recruiting and graduating White males as they are the statistically underserved population.

    And maybe if Higher Ed wasn’t so openly hostile to males, it wouldn’t have gone from 2:1 male to 2:1 female in just one generation, but I digress….

    Notwithstanding all of this, there is also a legal issue that may be worthy of pursuit — that of “hostile environment discrimination.”

    If the community college “sees white people and their practices, systems, and structures as harmful”, if it sees “White supremacist bias” behind every bush and boulder, then it is creating a hostile environment for White male students (and possibly employees). The landmark case in this regard is the 1986 US Supreme Court decision of Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, described here:

    Meritor was just a supervisor behaving badly, here the misbehavior involves the entire California Community College system, and is in the public sector as well.

    Sadly, I doubt that the US Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights (OCR) will care, particularly in light of who is currently running OCR– the only way to address this will be through litigation.

    But are there no attorneys in California?

    The Ninth Circuit (once called the “Ninth Circus”) isn’t as crazy left as it once was, and while you will likely lose in Federal District Court, you may not lose there — and if you do, take it to the Supreme Court that has just ruled (6-3) against Affirmative Retribution.

    Meritor and the related concept of “hostile environment” has been the law for nearly forty years, the concept of “hostile environment discrimination” has been taken into racial discrimination as well, and some ambitious young attorney looking to make a name for himself/herself could probably put an end to this foolishness. If the CCC system is actually saying the stuff that is alleged — and I don’t doubt they are — SCOTUS is not going to uphold it.


    *Enrollment is calculated two different ways. “Headcount” is literally that, the total number of students you have enrolled, including those only taking one class. Then there is “FTE” (Full Time Equivalent) which is the number of students you would have if all of your students were attending on a full-time basis. FTE can be a lot smaller than headcount if you have a lot of part-time students.

Leave a Reply

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