Racists rarely confess because confession serves no self-interested end.

Evidence

In the era of color-blind racism, no matter how gruesome the racial crime, no matter how much evidence was stacked against them, racists were standing up before the judge and claiming “not guilty.” But how many criminals actually confess when they don’t have to? From “civilizers” to standardized testers, assimilationists have rarely confessed to racism. Enslavers and Jim Crow segregationists went to their graves claiming innocence. — Ibram X. Kendi, Stamped from the Beginning, 1203

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the reader’s goal of testing Kendi’s inversion: here the denial of racism itself is evidence for the self-interest mechanism — admission would forfeit the material/status gains the policy delivers. Resonates with ‘Color-Blind Racism’ literature and the Bush Katrina denial as a live case.
• DEEPTHINKING: Not top-5% — the point (denial is rational under self-interest) is honestly argued but not paradigm-shifting beyond Kendi’s own framework.
• SEED: Angle: a ‘psychology of racial confession’ essay — under what political and legal conditions do perpetrators admit racist intent, and why does color-blindness raise the bar? Pairs Bush’s ‘all-time low’ quote against self-incrimination dynamics.