'Admit You're Uncomfortable Around Black People' and other nonsense

[mahagonny]

I knew this kind of silliness was coming. Me sitting here with my white privilege is murdering people.

'Admit that you are uncomfortable around black people.'

Nope.

'Stop pretending that you don't have any black friends because you don't come into contact with them.'

Wrong again. OTOH, would you be my friend? Doesn't sound like it.

'Take an honest assessment of your attitudes. Admit that you would be less likely to believe Floyd did nothing wrong without the video to prove it.'

Uhh, the video doesn't prove that. The video shows he was brutalized and then died, but it doesn't show he did nothing wrong.

'Acknowledge that your initial inclination always is to trust that the police always tell the truth.'

I don't.

link:

https://www.courant.com/opinion/op-ed/hc-op-glanton-white-america-mirror-george-floyd-0603-20200603-3c6zzlqtajfplmfak5ro7ulzxm-story.html

[permanent imposter]

This kind of polemic is what gets published nowadays. I admit to being ungracious and sometimes thinking similar thoughts of others who disagree with me politically, but I try not to publish those thoughts.

[mahagonny]

This kind of polemic is what gets published nowadays. I admit to being ungracious and sometimes thinking similar thoughts of others who disagree with me politically, but I try not to publish those thoughts.

Do you mean me or the writer?
I'm calling it nonsense because some of it is, and this is a forum where you can scrutinize what people publish for accuracy.
The thing that amazes me is the author expects this piece to have a positive effect on race relations and the future of black America with it. Sure, it's letting off steam, but  it's part of a plan. And there are plenty on that bandwagon. You know, sadly, the hope here is about as realistic as is some of the other things black culture has been doing, such as making stars and heroes out of hip hop performers who are criminals. These are the people they should praise and emulate? After all the wonderful athletes, musicians, poets, scientists, writers they have produced?  I admit I don't get it.
Also: claiming that we (whites) are uncomfortable around black people is gas lighting. Assuming the goal is for me to feel comfortable around black people, when is it determined that that has been accomplished? When you, the black writer, announce it? This is not going to work. We can't be living like that.

[Treehugger]

This kind of polemic is what gets published nowadays. I admit to being ungracious and sometimes thinking similar thoughts of others who disagree with me politically, but I try not to publish those thoughts.

So you self-censure?

[delsur]

link:

https://www.courant.com/opinion/op-ed/hc-op-glanton-white-america-mirror-george-floyd-0603-20200603-3c6zzlqtajfplmfak5ro7ulzxm-story.html

I can see how the provocative rhetoric of the piece may have distracted from the author's core message. If you are ever interested in reading about the effects of "structured blindness" in perpetuating racism, I would suggest The Racial Contract by philosopher Charles W. Mills.

[marshwiggle]

link:

https://www.courant.com/opinion/op-ed/hc-op-glanton-white-america-mirror-george-floyd-0603-20200603-3c6zzlqtajfplmfak5ro7ulzxm-story.html

I can see how the provocative rhetoric of the piece may have distracted from the author's core message. If you are ever interested in reading about the effects of "structured blindness" in perpetuating racism, I would suggest The Racial Contract by philosopher Charles W. Mills.

Interesting quote from the article:

Black people cannot exude a sense of superiority that we have never experienced.

This is stated unironically after having said, just a couple of sentences earlier:

American racism is a uniquely white trait. Black people cannot be racist toward you.

Obviously a sense of superiority is in the eye of the beholder.

[Treehugger]

Lots and lots of "white people" this and "white people" that in this article. Amazing how the author just knows how all "white people" think and feel. Good thing that blacks are inherently incapable of being "racist," otherwise it would seem that this opinion piece is pret-ty, pret-ty, pret-ty something .... ah yes, racist!

BTW, the reason black people can't be "racist" is that "racism" has been conveniently re-defined to exclude populations that have been historically discriminated against. So, blacks might not be "racist," but the author of this article certainly cannot recognize a self-serving tautology when she sees one.

[marshwiggle]

Lots and lots of "white people" this and "white people" that in this article. Amazing how the author just knows how all "white people" think and feel. Good thing that blacks are inherently incapable of being "racist," otherwise it would seem that this opinion piece is pret-ty, pret-ty, pret-ty something .... ah yes, racist!

BTW, the reason black people can't be "racist" is that "racism" has been conveniently re-defined to exclude populations that have been historically discriminated against. So, blacks might not be "racist," but the author of this article certainly cannot recognize a self-serving tautology when she sees one.

Do pomposity and self-righteousness count as "racist"? If someone talks down to basically everyone else, then perhaps they don't.

As the old saying goes, "I'm not a bigot; I hate everybody."

[Treehugger]

Lots and lots of "white people" this and "white people" that in this article. Amazing how the author just knows how all "white people" think and feel. Good thing that blacks are inherently incapable of being "racist," otherwise it would seem that this opinion piece is pret-ty, pret-ty, pret-ty something .... ah yes, racist!

BTW, the reason black people can't be "racist" is that "racism" has been conveniently re-defined to exclude populations that have been historically discriminated against. So, blacks might not be "racist," but the author of this article certainly cannot recognize a self-serving tautology when she sees one.

Do pomposity and self-righteousness count as "racist"? If someone talks down to basically everyone else, then perhaps they don't.

As the old saying goes, "I'm not a bigot; I hate everybody."

Hmmm. I thought broad-based stereotyping based on race was racist. Actually, that's the thing that really gets me about the whole social justice movement: it is all about race, about group identity and not about the individual. If we make everything all about race (or gender) hierarchies, guess what? It will always be all about race (or gender) hierarchies. There is no end game here. The individual needs to be taken back into account (even if this makes the theory messier and makes it harder to produce academic papers).

[marshwiggle]

Do pomposity and self-righteousness count as "racist"? If someone talks down to basically everyone else, then perhaps they don't.

As the old saying goes, "I'm not a bigot; I hate everybody."

Hmmm. I thought broad-based stereotyping based on race was racist. Actually, that's the thing that really gets me about the whole social justice movement: it is all about race, about group identity and not about the individual. If we make everything all about race (or gender) hierarchies, guess what? It will always be all about race (or gender) hierarchies. There is no end game here. The individual needs to be taken back into account (even if this makes the theory messier and makes it harder to produce academic papers).

Identitarians tend to be pretty quick to denounce people from the "correct" identities if they espouse the "wrong" views. (Remember Joe Biden recently explaining conditions under which "You ain't black"?) Similar to how a woman who questions some favourite idea of feminists gets accused of having "internalized misogyny". 
So group identity actually has as much to do with ideology as it does to physical characteristics.

[delsur]

Along with Charles W. Mills' The Racial Contract, this article by Robin DiAngelo might give you some perspective on the author's intentions.

https://libjournal.uncg.edu/ijcp/article/viewFile/249/116

I take this quote regarding the definition of racism from DiAngelo (p. 56):

Although mainstream definitions of racism are typically some variation of individual "race prejudice", which anyone of any race can have, Whiteness scholars define racism as encompassing economic, political, social, and cultural structures, actions, and beliefs that systematize and perpetuate an unequal distribution of privileges, resources and power between white people and people of color (Hilliard, 1992). This unequal distribution benefits whites and disadvantages people of color overall and as a group. Racism is not fluid in the U.S.; it does not flow back and forth, one day benefiting whites and another day (or even era) benefiting people of color. The direction of power between whites and people of color is his- toric, traditional, normalized, and deeply embedded in the fabric of U.S. society (Mills, 1999; Feagin, 2006).

[marshwiggle]

This says it all:

Although mainstream definitions of racism are typically some variation of individual "race prejudice", which anyone of any race can have,

i.e. what ordinary people mean when they speak of it.

Whiteness scholars define racism as encompassing economic, political, social, and cultural structures, actions, and beliefs that systematize and perpetuate an unequal distribution of privileges, resources and power between white people and people of color (Hilliard, 1992).

i.e. people working from the underlying assumption of white supremacy being the prime mover of history.

[mahagonny]

Along with Charles W. Mills' The Racial Contract, this article by Robin DiAngelo might give you some perspective on the author's intentions.

https://libjournal.uncg.edu/ijcp/article/viewFile/249/116

I take this quote regarding the definition of racism from DiAngelo (p. 56):

Although mainstream definitions of racism are typically some variation of individual "race prejudice", which anyone of any race can have, Whiteness scholars define racism as encompassing economic, political, social, and cultural structures, actions, and beliefs that systematize and perpetuate an unequal distribution of privileges, resources and power between white people and people of color (Hilliard, 1992). This unequal distribution benefits whites and disadvantages people of color overall and as a group. Racism is not fluid in the U.S.; it does not flow back and forth, one day benefiting whites and another day (or even era) benefiting people of color. The direction of power between whites and people of color is his- toric, traditional, normalized, and deeply embedded in the fabric of U.S. society (Mills, 1999; Feagin, 2006).

DiAngelo is the one who wrote Why It's Difficult For White People To Talk About Racism which I admit I've never read, but it sounds like she wants to speak for me, and she really can't. I guess that's why I never bought the book.  Another reason for me be less of a fan of tenure and academics.
Similar to what's going on here. I am not uncomfortable around black people. I'm pretty sure my neighborhood is as black as D'Angelo's or this author's.

[pigou]

I don't understand how "whiteness scholar" is a serious thing. Surely none of these behaviors or phenomena are unique to a racial context. If I replace "white" and "black" with "rich" and "poor," wouldn't I observe pretty much the same phenomena? E.g. criminalization of homelessness and begging. Income-based segregation. Etc. In fact, it's probably something that generalizes pretty well to any example of "high power" and "low power" groups or individuals.

The entire exercise of imputing motivation for people's behavior seems largely doomed. It's easy to come up with a post hoc explanation of how some action is really driven by or contributing to structural racism and a need to dominate others. Offered an internship to your neighbor's kid? Congratulations, you're contributing to structural inequality and the oppression of people who don't live in the same neighborhoods as key decision-makers. Is it because you hate poor people and want to perpetuate the existing class structures, or because you like your neighbor and it'd be awkward not to help out? Pick your narrative. Once established, narratives really don't get challenged enough. For another context, take the claim that "rape is about power, not sex." Suffers from the same problem: what kind of evidence could such a claim possibly be based on?

[delsur]

I don't understand how "whiteness scholar" is a serious thing.

I am not in critical whiteness studies and used to have a similar reaction to the term. But once you read the works of Charles W. Mills, Cedric Robinson, bell hooks, Franz Fanon, Eduardo Bonilla-Silva or many others who have written seriously about these issues, you might find that their perspectives are not as simplistic or unproductive as you imagine but rather important considerations toward a more equitable society.