Actual White Values

Recently people on twitter pointed towards so called "White Values by Smithsonian." In these small picture Smithsonian claims to have summarised what all white people believe in. Some of these not really wrong but many others are downright wrong and opposite of what any kind of white people actually believe or practice.

Unmasking Smithsonian Values

Here I also need to add that, "White people" are not a single entity with a single set of values shared across entire NATO or OECD. Germans and Italians are very different from what they believe and practice. However, the so-called White Values by Smithsonian managed to cite certain things that pretty much entire OECD rejects. I cannot say much for the US as I have not been in America, but even in theoretically culturally close Anglophone places like Australia and UK a lot is different.

However, I can point out where these so-called Smithsonian White Values came from, Puritans. Back in the days, Puritans were expelled from England for trying to impose on society their extremely radical views no one else could agree to. 

Nonetheless Puritans found new home in what is now the US, they founded Massachusetts Bay colony and run it according to these views and values. As time went on some of them who grew to disagree with Puritan rule, splintered from them to create their own colonies of Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Hampshire and Maine. Together this area of the US is called New England. That is about 1/3 of total original colonies that later rebelled against British rule and created the United States.

Officially Puritanism have disappeared, but I always suspected that its influence lingers in the US to a certain extend. These Smithsonian White Values is a prove of that. White Values here is misnomer however, it's not White Values, it's just neo-Puritan values. Some, but not all Americans share these values. I absolutely doubt they hold true elsewhere in the world.

Actual White or Western Values

Despite being inaccurate and misleading in their nature, timing of appearance of these White Values definitely carefully calculated. World is interested in what white people believe in, and neo-Puritans decided to use it as an attempt at come back.

I will go in the same order as Smithsonian organised it.

Individualism part is correct for the most part. Individual is primary unit and has autonomy from both society as whole and any individual social groups. Any group association is voluntary, and individual may always leave group that do not work for them, and no one can stop them. The only exception is classified military work, and you will always be informed in advance if anything is classified. Marriage can be dissolved if one partner asks for it, children can leave too and does not owe anything to their parents. Self-reliance is valued and encouraged, but that does not preclude welfare and government responsibility for wellbeing of their members (welfare). 

Last part "individuals assumed to be in control of their environment" as well as "you get what you deserve" is the most dubious part here. Its poorly worded and should not be considered as part of individualism. If it's about responsibility, then people have limited control over what happens around them and will not be blamed for things they have no control of. Neither law, nor society holds people liable for things around them. Unless their job responsibilities have the "duty of care" as part of role description. Some jobs are about maintaining certain condition of the premises. These are always limited to the workplace and do not extend to everyday life or applicable off duty.

Family Structure for the most part correct. Extended families are not something most can rely on, even grandparents (parents of the couple) are detached from so called nuclear family. That said its ok to be single or childless. Number of children depends on socio-economic condition. In 18th century people will have 9 or more kids because only few will live to adulthood due to high mortality. Nowadays people have only 1 or none at all.

Wife is subordinate of husband, I wonder about that, especially now that feminism poking its nose into it. You are probably best to discuss it with the girl if she sees herself as subordinated to husband before committing to her as I doubt you can enforce it against her will.

Children are raised to be autonomous and self-reliant, own rooms and so on.

Scientific Method They listed a few oddly specific methods there, like linear thinking or quantitative emphasis. It should not be limited to just these, scientific method is more complex than that. However, things are researched and new ideas are developed, using these and other methods. Relying on past knowledge is far not enough, there is clear emphasis on development of new technologies and theories need to be developed and people who aspire to do so need to learn the scientific method of doing it. Theories are debated and tested empirically. Those that work and useful get to be implemented. 

This applies to both technology and society at large. Work and social relationships, even culture and religion can be subject of scientific enquiry and may change if research finds that old practices are not as efficient and useful and something else. Nothing is too sacred to be questioned, but some more delicate matters have to be handled equally delicately.

History Now here it even hints on Puritan origin of the Smithsonian values. History varies from country to country. History is part of each nation story of what makes them who they are. History differs from one country to another. Each country has right to its own history, centered on them and narrating why they are more cool, awesome and special compared to countries around them.

There is no emphasis on Greko-Roman or Judeo-Christian tradition, at least in history. Fields like philosophy, math or geometry do cover Greeks extensively but not history.

There is a separate scientific study of history, that is more objective and common among the white nations, but that is for professional and amateur historians. There are few taboo subjects like Nazis, but in general its open uncensored research.

Protestant Work Ethic Not all white people are protestant, and not all protestants agree on common work ethics. While hard work is praised, it's not absolute, there is also smart work, work-life balance and more. Australia has heavy emphasis on fair pay, fair working condition and fair work in general. Work should sufficiently reward the people who do it or it's not fair. Left-wing Labor party if heavily focused on this and while right-wing Liberals avoid talking about it, they have no alternative values to speak of.

Religion is where Smithsonian gets it all wrong. 

White people are multi confessional. After many years of wars between Catholics and Protestants we now agree to disagree. There are many Christian denominations who all believe in vastly different things but co-exist in the same society that also includes non-Christian believes as well as atheism. There is clear separation between religion and state. One can believe anything or nothing at all and function in society all the same. While government does not ban religion or endorse official state atheism like communists do, laws and society are secular and detached from religion.

Single or multiple gods is just as optional as anything else.

So called Judeo-Christian tradition is also irrelevant to most, but the vocal rightist minority. A lot of people embrace Buddhism and other foreign religions, and it is considered normal.

Status, Power and Authority is another completely incorrect take from Smithsonian. The section jumbles together too many unrelated things. Justice section is also covered here.

To begin with there is Rule of Law, not rule of authority figure or respect for authority. Law is above everyone, including presidents and prime ministers. Law guarantees people's right and freedoms and protects them from among other things from authority figures. Law also protects people from unlawful conduct of other citizens. There is equality before law, means no matter what status you have or how rich of poor you are, law is applied the same way and treat you the same way. Law applies equally to homeless and presidents alike.

There is no special emphasis for property rights in justice system. There are certain entitlements that comes from owning anything but there are also more responsibilities, like paying rates. Ultimately the state (the crown) remains the sovereign over land and individual's ownership of said land is closer to hold than to ownership, perpetual tenancy. Tenancy agreements transfer actual control of property to a tenant and limit what owners can do with the property.

In the same way, there is no special emphasis on entitlements in justice system.

Intend does count, but facts count to. Intentionally killing people count as one type of crime (murder) and doing so unintentionally as a different one (manslaughter). This too vary from between legal systems. For example, Russian legal system does not differentiate based on intend.

Ownership of anything does not make you especially respected or loved. There are benefits from owning things, but that is about it. In the same way there is no particular respect for wealth in the same way it works in the United States. Australian and British people think the richer you are, the more you should contribute to the state and communal property in taxes. 

Overall, these attitudes vary from country to country and from social class to social class. Richer and more affluent classes tend to value wealth more and look down of poverty while poor and working class tend to believe rich ought to contribute more and support the poor. Rich people tend to think they deserve or earned their wealth, and poor people should not lay claim to it. Poor tend to think that all should contribute towards common good and welfare, with wealthier should pay more. Both sides tend to believe what benefits them most. In the US views are more pro-rich than say elsewhere while in the West and in Scandinavia they are more pro-poor.

Not everyone measures worth in money or property one's own, this is an American concept at best. A Massachusetts one at worst.

Some people see their job as something that defines them but it's perfectly normal to see it as just means to make money.

Time Once again American do it more than others. However, work in many industries indeed is measured and paid in hours worked. Compare to that countries like Russia and Saudi Arabia pay per month without taking in account number of hours worked, giving no insensitive for taking extra hours of overtime. Thus, time is a commodity. 

Rigid schedule is optional, but most Anglophones as well as Germans value being on time. South Europe is more relaxed about it and its ok to be late there.

Holidays Some holidays are based on Christian ones, typically those that themselves are based on pre-existing pagan holidays that most no longer remember now. However, there are many other reasons for holidays, for example military commemoration and many other things that government deem worthy of reverence. 

Aesthetics is another fully absurd article. If anything, arguments about tastes are pointless. That is why white people embrace freedom of choice. 

Also, there is fashion and thing get in fashion and get out of fashion. That allows for change in aesthetics to make sure looks never become too stall, same all the time. Fashion existed since times immemorial, and one can talk of things fashionable in 12th century and contrast that with 17th century or modern times.

Plain is not better; white people did went go as far as to discover America to get access to Southeast Asian spices. In general, white culture seeks to find and appropriate more interesting and likable aspects of cultures and societies around the world. Isolationism is an exception, not a rule.

In my experience non-white people care about blonde women a lot more than white ones. The only thing everyone will possibly agree on is that slimmer and younger women are better than fat and old ones. The rest is up to individual tastes and men prefer not to argue about it. Other things like face shape, skin and hair colour are very individual. 

Man's attractiveness depends on who you ask. Women are often divided between stability a wealthy man can offer and attractiveness of physically strong and muscular one. That said muscles will not get you anywhere in man's world, they will not give you friends or favors from male colleagues.

Future Orientation for the most part is correct. Delayed gratification only works in stable economic conditions though, but it is considered positive even if does not always work in practice.

Compared to Wahhabism that glorifies first 3 generations or Chinese ancestor worship, believe in better future is prevalent among the white people. Even those who are nostalgic about past, often think that future will be better.

Competitiveness has too many unnecessary subsections. Overall competitiveness is encouraged. Excelling in things is rewarded. There are no notions about keeping social harmony by staying quiet like in some Asian cultures. If you can do something better you can speak up and if it really works, you will be rewarded. 

Winners celebrated more than just rich and respectable. Those who were poor and became rich are celebrated more than those from rich and influential families. Those who have something tangible to show, like Elon Musk with his cars and rockets, are celebrated more because of the things they created. Meanwhile rich who inherited wealth from rich parents or without clear source of wealth are questioned at best, hated at worst. They are not criminalised however.

The only exception is relationship and family life. Some outspoken strong women who did well in business struggle in dating because men seek more docile and obedient women as a wife or girlfriend. Its either what husband likes or what boss likes, hardly anyone could manage both.

Aggressiveness is not encouraged, but proactiveness could often be useful.

Action orientation and doing something about situation valued more than not doing anything about it is once again more American than generally white, especially in such maximalist terms. However more often than not people want their problems solves and will value one who can solve problems. Few will understand doing nothing when a solution is readily available. However, if you do not have solutions that will work, only Americans will appreciate just doing something even if it is pointless.

Communication values vary from nation to nation and culture to culture. Some readily talk about personal life while others find it intrusive and unacceptable. Sometimes even different areas of the same country have vastly different attitudes when it comes to that. Southern areas are typically more open and northern more closed, but there are exceptions. 

Rules are normally written. Unspoken rules are extremely rare, and most of the time no one will blame one for ignoring them. Russia is exception to that, it's a country of unspoken rules. 

Thou unspoken rules in Russia apply mostly to elites as well as mafia. Common people do not follow them. Unspoken rules are favored by elites much more than by common people. Elites like them because it lets them hide their secret dealings from public. Public on the other hand hate them and believe they should be gone as they are nothing more than excuse for elites to steal.

There are certain courtesy words and things to say as part of politeness.

Northern areas do not show emotions, see Kimi Raikkonen as example, but showing emotions more common in the south Europe.

Formal communication as well as written communication has more rigid and conservative rules compare to informal and oral ones. You can express yourself with smiles in mobile texts, but you cannot use them in documents.

Outward Orientation is something not on the list, but I would like to add it. I mentioned some in aesthetics section, but this deserves a separate section. White people value good ideas, good products and other good things no matter where they come from. That is why we explore the world and invent things. To find better things or to create them.

Rome was successful because it could copy the good ideas from people around them. Renaissance Europe prospered because they discovered New World and brought lots of good and valuable things from there back home.

In contrast inward looking and very religious Medieval Europe was poor and miserable. Rome fell soon after Christianity spread throughout it.

Prosperity came back when religion was weakened and countries got more outward looking.

Thus, white people always looking for ways to do things better and improve their lives. Sometimes these efforts get into misguided territory like current gym obsession, but more often than not they bring the chance that improves.

Conclusion

That is all I can think of, at least for now. There is probably more, but I will live it at that.