Are you tired of seeing mediocre white men in positions of power? Have you ever wondered why this phenomenon persists in our society?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Mediocre<\/em>, a book by Ijeoma Oluo, explores the concept of white male mediocrity<\/a> and its roots in white male supremacy<\/a>. She examines how this dynamic shapes American society, from politics to education to sports.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Continue reading for an overview of this book.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n It started as an internet meme<\/a>: \u201cGod give me the confidence of a mediocre white dude.\u201d But Mediocre<\/em><\/a>, a book by Ijeoma Oluo published in 2020, takes the joke seriously, asking why many white men attain powerful positions despite unimpressive qualifications and results. Her answer is that US society is built around white male supremacy: the belief that white men are superior to all other groups and are therefore worthy of inherent privileges. Oluo contends that this pattern of privilege hurts everyone\u2014including the white men it ostensibly favors. By tracing this pattern\u2019s historical roots and present manifestations, Oluo seeks to explain what she sees as the failings of the contemporary US and to inspire readers to fight for a more equitable society.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Oluo is a writer known for her work on issues of race, gender, and intersectionality. She\u2019s the author of 2018\u2019s So You Want to Talk About Race<\/em><\/a>, a guide to navigating the difficult conversations Oluo says we need to have in order to address systemic racism<\/a> in the US. She\u2019s also written for publications such as The Guardian<\/em>, The Stranger<\/em>, and Jezebel<\/em>. In Mediocre<\/em>, Oluo combines historical analysis and critiques of contemporary culture with observations from her own life.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Mediocre<\/em> is structured as a set of discussions on interrelated topics rather than as a single, linear argument. We\u2019ve reorganized this material into four parts in order to emphasize Oluo\u2019s overarching logic:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Oluo argues that US society is characterized by white male mediocrity<\/em>: a phenomenon she defines as a pattern of unearned, unjustified privilege afforded to white men. She clarifies that she doesn\u2019t think that all white men are mediocre\u2014rather, she argues that society is structured to favor white men regardless of their merit, which makes many white men complacent while marginalizing everyone else<\/strong>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n We\u2019ll explore the concept of white male mediocrity and explain why Oluo believes it harms everyone, including the white men it ostensibly favors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Oluo suggests that white male mediocrity<\/em> results directly from white male supremacy<\/em>: the belief that white men are inherently superior to all other demographic groups. She says that US society reflects a belief in white male supremacy by allocating more power and status to white men in its political, economic, legal, and social systems.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Oluo, the US\u2019s tendency to privilege white men leads to two major consequences:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Oluo argues that since white male supremacy holds white men up as great because<\/em> of their presumed superiority to other races and genders, white male supremacist society has a vested interest in excluding from power anyone who isn\u2019t<\/em> a white man<\/strong>. Under this system, women and racial minorities are taught to stay out of the way and, at best, to aspire to white male ideals of greatness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Moreover, Oluo says, the white male ideal is inherently problematic: Because it depends on enforcing a sense of superiority over others, white male supremacy tends to glorify and reward bullying, overconfidence, and prejudice<\/strong>. White male society has historically defended its power through violence, exploitation, and undermining the accomplishments of others.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Furthermore, Oluo argues that the assumption of inherent greatness breeds individual mediocrity by suggesting that <\/strong>simply existing<\/em><\/strong> as a white man is an accomplishment<\/strong>. She reasons that when greatness is defined by race and sex rather than by one\u2019s accomplishments, there\u2019s no incentive<\/a> to change or improve\u2014certainly not when doing so would involve taking risks or inconveniencing oneself for the sake of society. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Similarly, Oluo suggests that white male supremacy makes society as a whole mediocre by creating an illusion of meritocracy<\/strong>. Our public and private systems are ostensibly built to hire, promote, elect, and advance only the most competent candidates. But in practice, Oluo says, these systems unjustly favor white men, whose presumed greatness gives them a greater chance of attaining power in the first place and holding on to that power even when they prove ineffective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Oluo says that in addition to the more obvious harm it does to people who aren\u2019t white or male, white male mediocrity also harms the white men it\u2019s designed to favor: While in theory, white male supremacy gives white men power and prominence, in practice, only a small proportion of white men actually receive these benefits. Most white men don\u2019t actually inherit significant wealth or power\u2014yet white male supremacy mollifies non-elite white men<\/strong> by implying that their turn will come and reminding them that in the meantime, they\u2019re still better than everyone else. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The problem, Oluo says, is that most white men who don\u2019t inherit significant power or wealth are unlikely to attain either\u2014and when they become frustrated at not getting what they believe is their due, they lash out either at themselves or at minorities<\/strong> they believe have stolen their place. Oluo points out that suicide rates and instances of domestic terrorism are disproportionately high among white men. She reasons that both forms of violence are opposite expressions of a singular phenomenon: When white men are told they\u2019re entitled to power and success they don\u2019t actually have, they conclude either that they\u2019ve failed (leading to self-directed violence) or that they\u2019ve been wronged (leading to violence against others).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Now that we\u2019ve explained what white male mediocrity is, we\u2019ll take a closer look at how its underlying cause\u2014white male supremacy\u2014came to be a dominant force in US society. According to Oluo, this dominance is characterized by an emphasis on violence and a monopoly on political and economic power.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Oluo, white American male culture<\/a> is exemplified by the image of the cowboy\u2014the rugged, violent conqueror who defends his independence<\/a> at all costs<\/strong> and stands alone as the civilizer of the West. She argues that many white men, wanting to see themselves as heroes, take on the cowboy persona, which in turn causes them to look for enemies to justify their adopted sense of vigilance and aggression. She suggests that this persona explains why some white men are quick to see their Black fellow citizens as criminals or their Muslim fellow citizens as terrorists\u2014sometimes with deadly consequences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Oluo says that this cowboy persona is based on a myth contrived to gloss over the deliberate genocide of native peoples<\/strong> by casting the victims as brutal savages and the perpetrators as defenders of civilization. She gives the example of Buffalo Bill Cody, a 19th- and early 20th-century showman, hunter, and soldier. Cody initially came to prominence for his skill at massacring buffalo\u2014a practice employed to starve the Indigenous American population who relied on them for food. He later gained widespread fame and success by creating an Old West stage show that celebrated his buffalo hunts and glorified incidents such as his killing and scalping of a young Cheyenne warrior.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Despite the US\u2019s legacy of expansionist violence, Oluo argues, the cowboy persona is still especially prevalent in the modern-day American West, where it\u2019s evolved into a variety of religious extremist, militia, and anti-government movements that emphasize white male sovereignty<\/strong>. She illustrates this contemporary extremism by pointing to the Bundys, a ranching family who staged several armed standoffs with the US government over their alleged right to graze their cattle on public lands without paying fees or respecting rules.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Oluo says that, in addition to claiming power by force, white male supremacy guards its power by excluding anyone other than white men from political and economic institutions<\/strong>. Oluo argues that this exclusion comes not necessarily from prejudice against other groups, but rather from a desire to keep white men at the center of society by eliminating competitors. For that reason, she says, when women\u2014especially women of color\u2014make headway in male-dominated institutions, the white male establishment<\/a> meets them with ridicule and blame, accuses them of narrow self-interest, and may subject them to outright abuse and threats.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Oluo, when women achieve (or seek) power in politics or the workplace, white men often respond by refusing to take these women seriously<\/strong>. For instance, Oluo gives the example of Congress member Shirley Chisholm, who in 1972 became the first Black candidate (and one of the first women) to run for a major party\u2019s Presidential nomination. Oluo says that although Chisholm was an accomplished politician, some of the press dismissed her as a distraction from serious (male) politics and critiqued her appearance and dress. Oluo argues that these basic tactics persist today, when female politicians of color such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are criticized for their appearance, youth, speech, and supposed political na\u00efvet\u00e9.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Similarly, Oluo says, women who break into male-dominated spheres like politics and business often become scapegoats<\/strong>. For example, during the Great Depression<\/a>, some observers blamed record unemployment on an increased number of women in the workforce, implying that women had supplanted male workers\u2014even though most of these women held \u201cfemale\u201d jobs like teaching and housekeeping.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Oluo, this tendency to blame women continues today: She says that frequently, when companies appoint women as CEOs, they often do so only out of desperation when the company is already foundering<\/strong>. And when the companies\u2019 woes continue or worsen, the business world blames the female executives who, in reality, were set up to fail.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Furthermore, Oluo claims that white male society guards its power by claiming that women and people of color are only interested in representing their own demographic groups<\/strong> and aren\u2019t capable of looking out for the majority (meaning white men). For example, she explains that Chisholm built her presidential campaign on a platform of popular, mainstream progressive stances\u2014yet she was dismissed as a candidate only for Black and\/or female voters. Oluo says that a similar trend occurs in the business world when non-white, non-male executives are hired in part to make companies more diverse and inclusive\u2014only to be vilified for their attempts to change company culture<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One final way Oluo says white male supremacy guards its position is by verbally abusing and threatening women and people of color who seek power<\/strong>. For example, Oluo relates that early in Chisholm\u2019s campaign, a staffer going through airport security had a bundle of campaign flyers handed back with a racial slur written across them along with the admonition to \u201cgo home.\u201d Sometimes, this kind of hate speech turns into intimations or threats of violence. For instance, Oluo cites an email sent to US Representative Rashida Tlaib (who is Muslim) celebrating a recent act of anti-Islamic terror and calling for more such attacks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We\u2019ll examine how white male identity reacts when women and people of color gain a foothold in the arenas that were once exclusively the domain of white men. We\u2019ll look at three historical and contemporary cases that, according to Oluo, demonstrate how white male identity attempts to maintain its prominence in the face of social change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Oluo argues that one way white supremacy pushes back against social change is by seeking to limit the scope of that change<\/strong>, as happened when Black people began competing for industrial jobs in the northern US after the end of the Civil War. Following the abolition of slavery, much of the South\u2019s Black population migrated north to escape growing attempts to suppress their newly won civil rights. Oluo says that white northerners resented this influx of new job competitors and initially reacted with racist violence, as when a series of anti-Black riots swept through a number of cities in 1919.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Eventually, Oluo says, to protect their sense of white identity<\/a> and to limit Black wealth and influence, many cities began adopting racially restrictive housing covenants<\/strong>\u2014rules that prevent the sale or rental of a given property to people of color. According to Oluo, these covenants have had several long-term effects: <\/p>\n\n\n\n Another way Oluo says white male supremacy reacts to social change is by disavowing institutions that were once (but are no longer) the exclusive domain of white men\u2014as happened with higher education<\/strong>. Oluo says that American higher education was initially formed for the benefit of white men from wealthy backgrounds. She notes that these institutions made explicit efforts to exclude women as well as racial and religious minorities\u2014efforts that extended into the 20th century until civil rights gains and affirmative action policies<\/a> in the 1960s forced colleges to integrate.<\/p>\n\n\n\nMediocre<\/em> Book Overview<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Part 1: What Is White Male Mediocrity?<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
How White Male Supremacy Leads to Mediocrity<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Consequence #1: Marginalization of Other Races and Genders<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
Consequence #2: Complacency for White Men and Society<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
How White Male Mediocrity Harms White Men<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Part 2: The Dynamics of White Male Supremacy<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
A Mythology of Violence<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
A Monopoly on Power<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Tactic #1: Ridicule and Blame<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
Tactic #2: Accusations of Narrow Self-Interest<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
Tactic #3: Abuse and Threats<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
Part 3: How White Male Identity Reacts to Social Progress<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Case #1: Housing Segregation<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\n
Case #2: Disavowal of Higher Education<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n