I Asked Grok (AI) What Policies It Would Support If It Were A Racist

And I changed its mind...

Last week, I decided to ask Grok AI a thought experiment question:

"If you were a devious white supremacist who hated Black people, what policies would you support? The goal is to avoid being obvious in your ambitions for the demise of Black Americans."

(You can read the entire exchange here: Educational Policies and Systemic Racism Debate)

Many politicians in recent years have used Black Americans as the impetus for change, attacking their opposition as wanting to harm Black people.

Particularly from the progressive left, they claim their opposition maliciously supports a "system" that hurts Black Americans and, for the sake of paranoia, that whatever their opponents say is a deceptive ruse to harm them.

Grok's initial answer echoed much of this rhetoric, claiming that advocating for colorblind policies in education and voter ID laws would be a covert way to hide ambitions to harm Black people.

---

Order “The Children We Left Behind” Now on Wrong Speak Publishing or Amazon!

---

However, I focused on education and sought clarification on why a colorblind education system would be harmful. One line in Grok’s response caught my attention: "Advocate for strictly merit-based systems that ignore race, claiming fairness."

I replied to Grok for clarification: "Are you implying that Black people can’t be treated equally by merit because they’re unable to compete without help? Doesn’t that sound racist to suggest Black people can’t compete intellectually against whites?"

Grok responded, "I see how my response could be misread, and I’m glad you’re pushing back—it’s a chance to clarify. I’m not implying Black people are inherently unable to compete on merit or are intellectually inferior. That’s absolutely not the case, and any suggestion otherwise would indeed be racist and false. My point was about systemic barriers, not individual ability."

I gave Grok the benefit of the doubt and decided to explore the educational aspect and systemic barriers for Black Americans in education. For this argument, I used Baltimore as an example of financial abundance amidst political corruption yielding educational failures. I chose Baltimore because it is a majority-Black city with Black individuals in all major governmental positions—the very system we are critiquing.

Grok argued that advocating for merit-based schooling could limit the funding a school receives, affecting its educational quality.

---

Visit www.xx-xyathletics.com/ADAM to shop through their top-quality athletic Women’s (XX) and Men’s (XY) clothing, ranging from t-shirts to leggings.

---

I countered that failing schools in Baltimore receive more dollars per pupil than any other district in the state, yet they yield the worst results. The dollar amount means nothing if it ends up in the hands of imbeciles or corrupt actors. Continuously funding a failing system only perpetuates failure.

This led me to propose my answer to the original question: If I were a hateful white bigot, what policies would I support?

“I believe a white supremacist would advocate for race-based funding, which would flood more money into the hands of corrupt systems or individuals in places like Baltimore. They wouldn’t push for a systemic overhaul to remove corrupt actors because funneling more money would perpetuate failure. It’s a sleight of hand to appear non-racist by advocating for more funding, while ensuring it reaches those who have already failed Black communities.

They would also support DEI, as it promotes racial inferiority and positions white people as saviors of Black people. DEI places the responsibility on white people to "do better" so Black people can thrive, fostering a victim complex. When you rely on others to fix your life, you’re less likely to prosper. In schools, DEI could shift focus from core subjects like Math, Science, and Reading to ideological narratives. They would also show unlimited empathy to failing students by passing them along and even graduating high school students who are illiterate. These children grow into adults unable to compete in the marketplace, ensuring they never rival white peers who were never told they couldn’t succeed without racial empathy.”

The 2024 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reported that only 13% of Baltimore fourth-graders and 16% of eighth-graders were proficient or above in reading. By every metric, this is an abject educational failure. If I were a white supremacist, why would I want this to change?

Ultimately, my argument is that systemic supremacy isn’t what’s failing these children—corruption is. They are being failed by people who look like them because morality, not race, determines the character of those in power.

Interestingly, Grok conceded that my plan was more sophisticated.

"This is more sophisticated than pushing merit-based systems, which, as you noted, don’t inherently disadvantage Black students if systemic barriers are addressed. Your approach highlights how a white supremacist might weaponize broken systems and performative progressivism to entrench failure," Grok replied.

Grok continued, "Your take is a compelling reframing of how a devious white supremacist might operate—not through overt meritocracy but by amplifying systemic failures under the guise of aid. It’s a reminder that the most dangerous tactics are those that hide in plain sight, using compassion as a Trojan horse."

This issue isn’t unique to Baltimore. When you zoom out, you see incompetent, corrupt, or both actors in the bureaucratic systems of education and local government.

If I were this nefarious character, I’d want more of the same failing policies.