Racism and Power

95 thoughts on Racism and Power

1. this is a very eloquent and powerful post thank you for this, sometimes when i speak out on racism i often get told that its all in my head or that im taking things to personal. Even when i am speaking out against discrimination i dont personally experience. I almost gave up speaking for my self because ive been told i dont know what racism is because i was raised by white parents(im black) smh if only they knew…

2. Whiteness has never known the sting of existing as a second class citizen, silencing, or being marginalized into obscurity.

   But because of the experiences of the Irish and Italians (for two easy examples) it thinks it does.

3. “Its land has not been colonized, its people have not been murdered and enslaved. Whiteness has never known the sting of existing as a second class citizen, silencing, or being marginalized into obscurity.”

   I’m assuming you are referring to whiteness that is anglo-saxon…but wait they were oppressed at one point or another as well?

   Assuming all white people come from Europe find me a country that has not be colonized or raped and pillaged by another stronger country? The Greeks were enslaved by the Turks. I do believe there was a MASSIVE genocide in the 40s where plenty of white people were killed. My people were raped, humiliated, butchered and imprisoned all because they were white Muslims in the early 90s. There is a lot of assumptions with this post mainly that for some reason being white means being exempt from suffering and oppression.

   This piece is very ethnocentric.

4. The idea of racism as prejudice infused with power can exist as a stand-alone concept. I don’t think it’s usefull to have “Whiteness” be the stand-in for this concept, since it can apply to any group in power. Using one color/race/group to stand for such a threat to society doesn’t sit well with me.

5. I’d like to reread your post with a few qualifiers strategically placed. I would caution you about using the term “whiteness” as a generalization. There are different manifestations of whiteness, and it would be interesting to see the points of connection to racism and power across cultural lines. Surely there are similarities despite the differences. I would also be interested to know where and when non-whites reinforce, to their own detriment or for their own solidarity, the dominant narrative.

   I agree with you. The dominant narrative of race in the US prefers to see racism as an individual problem, rather than a systemic or institutionalized problem. To do otherwise would be to admit to problems with OUR/MY society. Americans of the Anglo-cultural variety generally consider that kind of thing, that is descent, complaint or “whining” (conveniently) as both “unmanly” and unseemly. This shuts the door to discussion.

   Thanks for an interesting post. I’ll be teaching a class on race and popular culture in the fall and I have been reading and learning and thinking a lot about these questions all summer. (I can’t believe the summer is over!) I’m anticipating I’ll learn a lot from students and our discussions as the semester progresses. At least I hope to…. we’ll see how it turns out.

   Which brings me to my next question. Why use the passive voice when you say, “we are encouraged not to speak about race or racism”? Why not say who discourages us? And, when you’ve experienced this happening. I’m not disagreeing with your main point, just looking for some clarification.

   1. Hey, everyone: Renee addressed why she uses the word “whiteness” in her very first post of her guest-blogging stint. She also said there that many seem to take it very personally and complain, and that if it’s not about you it’s not about you. So, you know. I find it interesting, if unsurprising, that she’s being scolded about it here.

6. Its land has not been colonized, its people have not been murdered and enslaved.
   Didn’t the Roman Empire do precisely that? They colonized the hell out of Europe, iirc (conquered land, built towns everywhere, exploited resources, killed the “uppity” natives, the works)…

   I don’t think it’s usefull to have “Whiteness” be the stand-in for this concept, since it can apply to any group in power.
   And it shouldn’t be, since by that definition any majority group can be and probably is racist, regardless of what race they happen to be.

7. Individual white people, or even whole white cultures have been colonized, oppressed, & etc. But it can be argued that “Whiteness” has never suffered these things. In a way you might argue that it’s defined as not being oppressed or dis-empowered. This would imply that, historically, not all white groups at all times have possessed “Whiteness”.

   I’m thinking of the book “How the Irish became white” as an example.

8. ‘This would imply that, historically, not all white groups at all times have possessed “Whiteness”.’

   I should add “or at least not to the same degree.”

9. I agree with most of the points in your post, Renee, and I think that understanding the power built into racism (and how it transforms simple prejudice into racism) is vitally important. I would, however, like to quibble with a small point.

   Its land has not been colonized, its people have not been murdered and enslaved. Whiteness has never known the sting of existing as a second class citizen, silencing, or being marginalized into obscurity.

   Thats not quite true. While whiteness has not known such things for quite some time, its demonstrably untrue that a great many white people don’t bear the cultural scars of racism.

   I’m fairly white. My background is a quarter Scottish, a quarter German, and half Bohemian (what would now be called Czech). I recognize that as a white man I hold an immense about of privilege and power, and that a great deal of that comes merely from being white, that it is not earned but stolen. However, I have also experienced a significant lack of identity precisely because of the things you say I have never experienced. The cultures that I come from are essentially cultureless, stronger groups of white people at various points in history colonized my ancestors, their faiths were outlawed by force, their Gods either co-opted by Christian missionaries or simply snuffed from history, their traditions forced to exist in the context of a faith they followed at the edge of a blade and a system of slavery (because lets call feudalism what it fucking is) that they had no power to resist. I couldn’t tell you the names of the pre-Christian gods of any of my ancestors. In the case of my Scottish roots the colonialism and murder is even more clear as it doesn’t have the romantic bullshit of knights and and a stolen messiah to cover up the atrocity. All too often in discussion about racism we forget that the remnants of the Roman Empire and the plague of Christianity were pretty much indiscriminate in their systematic destruction and homogenization of every part of the world they stained with their presence.

   I’ll take responsibility for my part in racism and I’ll work as hard as I can to try to mitigate some fraction of the damage my forbearers and myself have caused because I see no other moral option, but I think its unfair to ask me to give up the echo of the culture I was never allowed to know by denying that I have lost anything.

10. Individual white people, or even whole white cultures have been colonized, oppressed, & etc. But it can be argued that “Whiteness” has never suffered these things. In a way you might argue that it’s defined as not being oppressed or dis-empowered. This would imply that, historically, not all white groups at all times have possessed “Whiteness”.

    So we’re not so much talking about “whiteness” as “Mediterranean-ness,” because really if you follow the path of colonial power and broken cultures you end up at Rome and the Church.

11. I do believe there was a MASSIVE genocide in the 40s where plenty of white people were killed.

    You’ve got to be kidding if you think Jews get white privilege.

12. Neither the Irish or Italians were considered ‘white’ until the 20th century.

    And lets see, I don’t recall any slave castles being built in Ireland. I never heard of slavers raiding Irish coastal villages and carrying off those people on the dreaded ‘North Atlantic passage’ to be sold off in the Americas.

    Racism equal prejudice plus power. And riddle me this, what ethnic group has had the power to negatively impact the lives of people of color, and has repeatedly exercised that power over the sweep of world history?

13. The definition of who and what is considered to be White has fluctuated but none amount to the continued experience of people of color. While it is fine to say that the Irish were once considered on the same level as Blacks, or other POC, their treatment was not the same and they existed with the ability to transcend a negative descriptor whereas; POC who do not have the ability to pass, have yet to be accorded with even the most basic human dignity.

    I am quite unsurprised that so many have shown up to shake their fists at this posts. I fear the issue with the term Whiteness, is that despite the fact that I have clearly stated that it is not to be personalized, many have done so. Whiteness is about the power to act along racial lines. Race is very much a construction and therefore who may or may not be accorded with the label fluctuates over time. What is clear is that no such fluctuation of standing has ever existed for POC. From our very first interactions we were understood to be secondary bodies.

14. I cannot believe the amount of denial being expressed in these comments

15. Just to clarify this discussion of whiteness and the Irish in the U.S.–their whitening process really had nothing to do with “passing” or phenotype. Their eventual acceptance as “white” was precipitated by three factors: 1) Their concentration in urban centers and Democratic party politics (see David Roediger’s Wages of Whiteness); 2) Their position in the ethnic labor queue (see Roger Waldinger’s Still the Promised City); and 3) The shift in the U.S. Census following WW2 that removed “Euro-ethnics” from the racial classification section (see Karen Brodkin’s How Jew Became White Folk). In other words, their “whiteness” emerged from political, economic and institutional changes–the Dem, Party needed a new constituency to leverage political gain, Irish had access to manufacturing positions at a historical moment in which the same positions were either unavailable and/or undesirable to other races (affording them future mobility and skills), AND federal policy that institutionalized a new socially constructed racial identity.

    Needless to say, “whiteness” is complicated, historically contingent, and remarkably malleable. Just ask present-day Cubans in Miami.

16. Hey, well, uh…

    Whiteness=/white people

    Irish people being enslaved by the likes of Cromwell is both the point and besides the point. Renee is talking about processes of whiteness, one of the key elements being dehistorification/decontextualize the present in order to serve the current power structure. What she is saying is that whiteness is an expression of power and inseperable. When the Irish were slaves, they could not be white, it was wrong to think of those people as white. When they seized the ability to describe themselves as white (much of that by stomping down on people lower on the ladder), they became white. Of course, at the expense of some of their Irishness, natch.

    So to nitpick by talking about ethnicity and how they weren’t considered white is besides the point. A trivial answer that feeds into her general point.

17. First of all, as a white person, can we please stop talking about white people in this thread? That is not the subject of Renee’s post. I believe it’s called Racism and Power, not White Suffering Throughout History or Who Is White and When Did They Become So?. She is clearly addressing a particular power structure that exists in our country today. I for one would like to explore that, not read a list of white people grievances. Geez.

    Now to my real comment:

    I’ve come to see a lot of parallels between the entrenched system of Patriarchy and the entrenched racist power construct you term Whiteness; especially in the way members of the privileged group can be invisibly/subconsciously indoctrinated to uphold the system and that after decades of activism it seems the “little” expressions of oppression and denials that it even still exists function in aggregate to stall progress toward equality (I’m not denying the explicit messages and expressions, just not addressing them in this comment). And as in resisting Patriarchy where many women are accused of being man-haters, PoC resisting Racism/Whiteness are accused of racism toward whites (acknowledging that man-haters and racists do exist).

    I would be very interested to know your opinion on a) whether Whiteness can be separated from the current power structure and b) how that might best be accomplished with respect to whites and non-whites working together and/or concurrently toward that goal. Do you think that resistance to Whiteness requires significantly different tactics than resistance to Patriarchy?

    Thanks for a great, thought-provoking post.

    P.S.
    I would quibble a bit to say that while I accept Whiteness vs. “some white people,” in your writing you sometimes let “white people” stand in for Whiteness. To me, it is a similar rhetorical error as substituting “men” for Patriarchy or Sexism. While men are the primary purpotrators, men in and of themselves are not the the enemy, the systems are. Just as white people in and of themselves are not the problem, Whiteness as you use the term is. I think it is this sometime use of the phrase “white people” that white readers are taking personally, getting defensive about and allowing to prevent them from further considering your (valid) points. So while some white people need to chill the f*** out and you may not care whether they do or not, it may be something to consider.

18. We are specifically taught to look at acts as individual instances, as though they do not amount to a society dedicated to a hierarchy of bodies, that relegate some to lives of obscurity and marginalization.

    I think the above quotation from the post is really insightful. It’s something that I see happening all the time, but I’m not sure that I would have thought about it in quite that way without reading this post.

    Therefore, it’s frustrating that so many commenters on this post are trying to bring the focus around to white people’s problems. Seriously, just stop. Make another post somewhere else if you think it’s important, but don’t push aside the main point of this post because you’re offended that the poster didn’t put every nuance you would have liked into the term “whiteness” (and honestly, such offense would be unwarranted, given the context. This post isn’t about Romans oppressing white Europeans; it’s about people whose skin is white exploiting people whose skin is not white, and how heinous it is that it STILL GOES ON and people STILL TRY TO JUSTIFY IT).

    Frankly, William’s comments illustrate the point of the post beautifully. How many people from the African diaspora can name so precisely where their ancestors came from? How many are encouraged to research their family background the way white people are encouraged to?

    How hard is it to LISTEN, just once, without being defensive?

19. You can’t believe it, Roxie? Why not? Par for the course.

    I do find it hilarious that people are saying, “Well, white people have been colonized and oppressed, too!” and actually mentioning the Roman Empire. Seriously, guys? Two thousand years ago? Furthermore, Renee didn’t say people who are now identified as white have never been colonized and oppressed. We may look back on Gauls and Saxons and Goths and call them “white,” but two thousand years ago, there was no such thing as whiteness. Race is a social construct of 17th and 18th century Europe. Since northern Europeans decided they were “white,” whiteness has been about difference from and supremacy over those-who-do-not-possess-whiteness.

20. I find fascinating all the denial, defensiveness, reaching back in history and mapping of the world people are doing here to effectively derail Renee’s post, if not intentionally. I don’t believe this is about former Yugoslavia, the Roman and Ottoman Empires (?!), WWII, the “culturelessness” of some white European cultures stripped of their pagan beliefs, Italians in early and mid 20th century American history, etc., horrible and painful and undeniable as they all were This is about race, privilege and power in our society not just historically, but in the here and now.

    I would like all those who find this post so problematic to stick to present day North America when disagreeing, and try to argue with this post from this vantage point, and no other. Let’s see if we can rationally argue that somehow Irish, Italian and even Jewish Americans, despite lingering anti-Semitism, also bear the same scars of racism and somehow also don’t have similar access to white privilege in our society today, privilege that black and brown and first nation peoples will always be fiercely denied. Even Asian Americans can acquire some good ole American white privilege, despite the horrific history of racism against them in this country, if they position themselves against blacks. Many Arab Americans have done this, too, much to the detriment of solidarity between African Americans and Arab Americans. Too many immigrants have played the “at least we are not like American blacks” card to distinguish themselves and gain membership into the white power structure, even POC immigrants.

    In fact, that has been the most salient reason why historically oppressed immigrants, like the Irish and Italians, were allowed membership into the white power structure: because all too many grabbed the opportunity to position themselves against blacks in particular in fighting for their piece of the American pie. For all their differences and the very real oppression and racism many experienced, many immigrants and their offspring have had this advantage, and consciously or unconsciously chose to use it (myself included). My relatives and ancestors did this (Jewish, Polish, Arab, Asian, Irish, even my Roma ancestors). Why is it so hard for white progressives that post here to admit and own this fundamental historical fact of our society? As Monica says, riddle me this, indeed. Maybe I need a lesson in Whiteness 101 to understand how one who considers themselves progressive, feminist, etc. can deny this.

21. Um, wow. Thanks for the post, Renee. Some of these comments are uh, we used to call them “interesting” back where I am from.

22. @ Shah8: “whiteness is an expression of power” –ok then. So when my husband says that some other black dude is “acting white” he means he is “expressing his power”? I dunno.

    Still, I’m very intrigued by that statement because I would say that power came first, then race. And, you’re right, power was racialized White because those were the people rigging the game in their favor.

    @ Hot Tramp: “Seriously, guys? Two thousand years ago?” Yep. Don’t underestimate the impact of the Greco-Roman, Judeo-Christian foundation upon which racialized difference as a means to power and privilege was built, and is continuously reproduced.

    I would say to really understand the structure of it, you have to go back to the Greeks, after whom the Romans were modeling themselves. Aristotle specifically establishes the binary system and speaks of “natural slavery” without ever mentioning race. That part gets added much later. But save yourself the grief, he’s not much fun to read and all of that is now null and void.

    The paradigm shift that has to happen is simply acceptance of the truth of genetics. We haven’t fully come to grips with the undeniable facts of our genetic commonality. Fight for science! No prayers in school, no teaching anything other than evolution. All children must know that we are all born of the same African Mother, or one of a few thousand African women 50,000 years ago.

23. /me counts to 10

    dude, whiteness is a self-fulfilling archetype, representative of what a person who has power should look like.

    it doesn’t have a thing to do with “acting white”. That’s a condemnation for being out of place, socially. That person “acting white” has no power to be white.

    That power to name yourself is a privilege that goes to people who are able to command others.

24. and an addendum, Aristotle lived mostly in a post-peloponnesian war world–where each greek city was pretty much warring on another, sacking cities and selling the women and children of the defeated tribes. His concept of natural slavery was, for all intents of purposes, an attempt ot say, fellows, fellows, fellows, why are we going through all this trouble slaving one another when we can enslave some barbarian chick. Race had very little to with this.

    and oh yes, a further addendum, the western world does not get its ideas about slavery from the greeks. The main early influence was St Paul–and roman by context, and that was just for the catholic nations. Which were substantially added to by native ideas of slavery.

25. @ Shah8: “whiteness is an expression of power” –ok then. So when my husband says that some other black dude is “acting white” he means he is “expressing his power”? I dunno.

    No, your husband is saying “LOL LOOK AT THAT UPPITY NEGRO THINKING SIE DESERVES THE SAME PRIVILEGES AND RIGHTS I HAVE AND SHIT LOL!!” aka, being a racist.

26. Renee you say in your article “Whiteness has never known the sting of existing as a second class citizen, silencing, or being marginalized into obscurity. I take issue with you on this. I live in the new South Africa, a country built by white/western expertise now run by the ANC. A country where whites are outnumbered 10 to 1 and where a young white male has no opportunity at all, because he happens to be white. A country where even though the white people are outnumbered, affirmative action laws meant to protect the minority have been legislated to protect the black majority. It is time we come to realize that racism is a universal sin of humanity and is not confined to whites only. This is a fact I share in my book “too much baggage for the promised land” in a series of stories from the gold mines in South Africa. I also suggest you find out more on my website www dot toomuchbaggageforthepromisedland dot ewebsite dot com

27. @ dcardona:

    Thank you for writing those comments about Patriarchy/Whiteness. I sensed a connection, but couldn’t explain it. You did, and quite well.

    Your questions are intriguing. I hope others will consider answering them.

28. “How hard is it to LISTEN, just once, without being defensive?”

    Um, the reason why this is an open thread is so that we can reply and be defensive if we want. Don’t try to shut people up just cause you don’t like what they’re saying…I think it’s allowed to get offended.

29. I appreciated hearing this. Thank you.

30. If whiteness is actually a continuation of greco-roman supremacy, where are the overwhelming numbers of greeks and romans in the senate? or the house of representatives? Name the first 50 greek US presidents. Point to the overwhelming preponderance of Italian supreme court justices.

    these positions of power are not filled with greeks and romans, because the power structure is not about privileging those two ethnic groups.

    the system privileges whiteness, and those who have been defined as white changes over time.

    Ironically Mediterranean people, including Greeks and Romans/Italians, were specifically NOT included in whiteness at the beginning of the 20th c. Scottish and Irish ppl were not considered white then either.

    However, those ethnic identities HAVE been subsumed in or accepted into whiteness — whereas people of African descent will never be defined as white. We are who “whiteness” was created to exclude.

31. “Unlike people of color, Whiteness has no foundation for its hatred other than the perpetuation of hegemony. Its land has not been colonized, its people have not been murdered and enslaved. Whiteness has never known the sting of existing as a second class citizen, silencing, or being marginalized into obscurity. In any all discussions…”

    The author lacks very basic historical knowledge. Whites know very well all the negative feelings.

    Just some 70 years ago white Austria and Czechoslovakia were annexed by white Germany. Then II World War began by white Poland being invaded by white Germany and white Soviet Union. What followed was enslavement of the Jews, Poles, Ukrainians etc. who were referred to as “subhumans” by the Germans. The result was the murder of 6 million white Jews and 3 million white Poles. Millions whites from Eastern Europe were enslaved in Soviet Gulag and many died at the hands of white Soviets.

    If you take a look at the tragic events in Rwanda or in the Middle East in recent years you’ll see that unfortunately hate, desire to dominate at all cost are universal attributes of human kind regardless of color, nationality, religion etc.

    Let’s not limit our fight against hate, prejudice and violence to whites because they are not worse or better than others.

32. No, your husband is saying “LOL LOOK AT THAT UPPITY NEGRO THINKING SIE DESERVES THE SAME PRIVILEGES AND RIGHTS I HAVE AND SHIT LOL!!” aka, being a racist.

    Uh, I could be wrong, but when laprofe63 says her husband is talking about “some other black dude”, doesn’t that pretty strongly imply that her husband *is* a black dude, and therefore, is *not* saying “look at that uppity negro thinking sie deserves the same privileges and rights I have as a white person?” Due to, y’know, not being a white person?

    I mean, maybe I misread it, but I didn’t see another black dude for her husband to be talking about besides himself when she says he is talking about “some other” black dude. Had he been a white guy the phrase would have been “some black dude”, not “some other black dude”.

    There’s a big difference between a white person claiming that a black guy is acting white, and a black person claiming that a black guy is acting white. Mind you, I think they’re both wrong, but the black person *may* be legitimately saying “Look at that guy — he’s a black person just like me, but he rejects his cultural heritage and treats other black people as if he is a white person”. Or he could be saying “look at that guy — he’s a black person who is oppressed just like me, but he thinks he deserves white privilege! What is he, stupid? Or does he think he’s better than me, just because I’ve internalized racism and accept that there are privileges I’m not allowed to have?”

    However, the white guy can only be saying what you said above. There’s never any excuse for saying that. So it’s kind of important to know whether the speaker is black or white before making a judgement as to what they mean by calling a black person “acting white”.

33. You’re right, Alara — I missed that key wording due to a) being up way later than I should be and b) the context of laprofe63’s comment, which seems to be about how we should talk about how white people may have been oppressed thousands of years ago instead of talking about the people of color who are oppressed by Whiteness RIGHT NOW. Which strikes me as an odd opinion to have as the partner of a non-white person.

    The history lesson is interesting and all, but I fail to see how it has any relevance to the conversation Renee is trying to have.

34. Some of these comments are mind-blowing. Renee – thank you for this post. I think if anyone needed confirmation of your points they’d only need to look through some of these comments.

35. “I would like all those who find this post so problematic to stick to present day North America when disagreeing…”

    Allow me as a first time (and maybe last) commentator to explain my concerns I addressed in my previous comment.

    As a white male (Eastern European immigrant) I find this article fascinatingly wrong and narrow-minded, and unfortunately a typical left wing mumbo-jumbo. Even if you “stick to present day North America” you can’t disregard experiences of many, if not most, whites whose ancestors came here because of various atrocities they suffered back in the countries they left. Wherever they came from they were often enslaved, marginalized and silenced. More that North American blacks? Good question if you know anything about European feudalism and early capitalism. Did they contribute to the “white power structure” in the USA? I doubt they were aware of it while working 12-14 hours shifts in meat plants in Chicago or steel mills in Pittsburgh.

    Having said that I am asking a rhetorical question – are American whites really an oppressive, power grabbing monolith or are they very diverse and not entirely evil group?

    Yes, I am a white male. Well, until I open my mouth. Then I often hear or see comments and facial expressions that can be described as “Oh, I am not sure he can handle that. He can’t even speak good English”. And I am talking about all of you – white and black.

36. Thanks Alara. Exactly. My husband is black and I placed that “another” there purposefully to communicate that point. Of course “acting white” doesn’t translate into “being white.” Duh. Besides, no white person would ever say a black person was “acting white.” That is laughable! The average white person over 30 is generally ignorant of what “whiteness” as a performance even means or that it exists!

    And if white folks are aware of those things, because they are blessed with the superior knowledge of youth, and they do say a black person is “acting white” then they are likely to be those white kids in the Dave Chappelle Clayton Bigsby skit.

    But I digress.

    I think your globalizing and totalizing language deters from the power and impact of your arguments. Whiteness, as blackness, brownness, etc. is a shifting qualifier. It never means only one thing to all people. Can’t. Ever.

    When I read things like “whiteness is a self-fulfilling archetype, representative of what a person who has power should look like” I’m not sure what that means in plain English. Are you saying that there is no getting out from under the association of white skin with power (or conversely brown skin with secondary embodiment, as Renee said)? Or, that there is no changing the structure or practice of white privilege? I can’t imagine that you are.

    Is all power (all around the globe) by definition white?

    If you’re merely stating the fact of whiteness being equated with power, ok then. But wow. Seems a bit obvious and begs the question, now what?

    And thanks for the clarification re: Aristotle and his lack of contribution to anything regarding Western slavery. All praise due to your sharp intellect. My point remains: who the fuck cares how it started? The way to end it is to focus on the facts of science, not the bullshit of history.

37. Pingback: links for 2009-08-20 « Embololalia

38. It’s interesting most comments defending this post claim it “is about race, privilege and power in our society not just historically, but in the here and now” when the post clearly says otherwise:

    “Its land has not been colonized, its people have not been murdered and enslaved. Whiteness has never known the sting of existing as a second class citizen, silencing, or being marginalized into obscurity”

    Most of those practices, at least in the West, are in the past. The criticizing commentators are simply pointing out that this statement is extremely simplistic. The only way “Whiteness” could fit the above description is if the term excluded every single white person in America today. In other words, the only way the statement makes sense is if “Whiteness” is just defined as “Oppressor,” in which case I don’t see how the post says anything about race relations today.

    And besides, there would be no reason to use the term “Whiteness” if not to talk about white people, who, again, don’t fit the above quoted description of “Whiteness.” Complaining that some people would take the term “personally” seems a bit unrealistic. If I started going on about “Blackness,” I assume people would take it quite personally.

39. I think many of the commentors here are missing the point.

    Yes, many European (white) groups came to the US to escape oppressive regimes. And yes, some of those groups spent a generation or two living under equal oppression once they arrived in the US. But because of the nature of the beast that is the United States, once the brogues and accents wore off that oppression was no longer a part of their every day lives! They assimilated – whether they wanted to or not is beside the point. Because of the color of their skin they are/were assimilated and are now a part of the oppressive group.

    That is not to say that they are oppressors, but they still benefit from white privilege. This is not possible for people of color! No matter how many generations pass, they will not ‘automatically’ assimilate the way the Irish and the Italins et al did.

    Whiteness exists. I don’t like it. I don’t like to admit it. And I hate like hell that I benefit from it to the detriment of someone else, but I do.

40. Thank you Pega. It’s hard for me to get past the anger & frustration about these comments to make any sort of contributory comment.

41. I knew Renee was going to shake a lot of people out of their complacency. And that is a very, very good thing. And how hard is it to understand that she uses “Whiteness” and not “white people” in the same way that feminists use “the patriarchy” and not “men”?

    “Individual white people, or even whole white cultures have been colonized, oppressed, & etc. But it can be argued that ‘Whiteness’ has never suffered these things.”

    Yes, this, exactly! I wish I’d been able to come up with this insight. And can we please stop bringing up the fact that Irish/Ashkenazi Jewish people/Italians/etc. were once not considered white as an excuse for not owning present-day white privilege & racism?

    And can anyone believe that a white South African is actually trying to claim that he’s part of an oppressed racial minority? I have no words for such jaw-dropping self-absorption.

    “If you take a look at the tragic events in Rwanda or in the Middle East in recent years you’ll see that unfortunately hate, desire to dominate at all cost are universal attributes of human kind regardless of color”

    And what can I say about this? Does no one in the US study history any more? The situations in Rwanda & the Middle East are the DIRECT RESULTS of Euro-American colonialism and continued racist practices. The so-called “ethnic divisions” in Rwanda were CREATED by the French, for god’s sake. And Islamic fundamentalism was borne out of reaction against foreign domination. And we can go further: the instability of so many African & Latin American states is also the direct result of colonialism.

    @JWK: As you’ve pointed out, English is not your first language, so maybe some of the connotations of words and expressions are not clear to you. “Whiteness” is not about individual white people, or even specific groups of white people. It’s not saying that every single white person automatically has an easier life thatn every single person of colour. Renee is talking about “Whiteness” more as an ideology that bascially says Europeanness (in all parts of life & culture) is always superior, not about every individual white person being racist.

    I don’t know what country you come from, but I do know this: in your country, there is a problem with racism that takes the form of a generalised sense of white supremacy and xenophobia. Because that is true of all white-majority countries. Yes, white people do oppress each other, often brutally and horribly, but no matter how far down on the scale your group is in relation to other whites, you’re still considered superior to POC.

    “Most of those practices, at least in the West, are in the past.”

    Really???!!? Did I somehow magically transport to a world where the wars in Afghanistan & Iraq do not exist? You are aware that those wars are illegal? And that many US/European businesses are making SHITLOADS of money out of them? So, what do we call invading countries, deposing their leaders*, installing governments to our own satisfaction, then appropriating their natural resources for our own profit, if not colonialism? And, oh yeah: odd how the people of both those countries just happen to be brown. Nahhhh, you’re right, Step: Whiteness just isn’t an issue.

    *And before anyone starts bleating on about how evil Saddam was, can I just say this?: yes, he was, AND he was put into power by……WESTERN POWERS, including, oh yes, the USA. Get over it: colonialism is in no way in the past.

42. You know what? This is actually a pretty cool thread, in its own twisted way. The gymnastics here are pretty innovative and we see new ways of exploring the particulars rather than the inclusively global.

    The ability to agressively miss the point is a privilege too, and this sort of thing is why we all of us can’t have these conversations outside of coercive circumstances.

    Again….whiteness does not mean white people, and Renee is not talking about countries on a map–rather, she speaks of the nation of PastTime Paradise.

    Oh! and yeah, speaking of the particulars, say, what didja think of the rest of her essay?

43. I’m not making the term `whiteness’ about me. And I’m not making it not about me.

    But I would like to ask about the use of that terminology. Why is it the best term to get across what you want, and to achieve what you want with this discussion? It does create a lot of noise, and I’m interested in why you use it rather than another term.

44. What is unclear from this essay, and others like it, is how “whiteness” is able to “do” anything. Renee claims to have not made this “about white people,” de-personalizing it, so to speak. But she doesn’t claim that whiteness *is* systemic, or part of a system, but rather that “whiteness *acts* systemically.” Moreover, in her terminology, whiteness is given action to realize “its” (collective? systemic?) goals–“its hatred,” for example. Through her very language, “whiteness” is at once a structure of privilege AND an independent agent able to act on “its” on volition. In her introductory post, she juxtaposes “whiteness” with “bodies of color,” thereby very clearly personalizing “whiteness.” If whiteness is systemic, how can we cleanly compare “it” to bodies of color, if not by imputing personal agency to the system? This analytical confusion spawns questions from the crowd (the readers here), and subsequent responses point to their privilege rather than identifying some of the linguistic and theoretical contradictions of the essay. Whiteness is somehow assumed to act on “its” own, but we really have no idea what allows “it” to do anything. Agency is given to something which by 1) point of fact and 2) Renee’s own definition is supposed to be a system of advantage that, as she writes, should not equate with “some white people.”

    Indeed, It is a racially stratified *system* (or, structure) that privileges those with the power to dominate and determine the ruling hegemony (culture, norms, values) that works to oppress those groups at the bottom of the order. It is the system that creates categorical inequality, allows for unequal access to resources, and proliferates the ruling ideology of those in power. Racial inequality and racism are just simply *not* a product of a racial category infused with power that somehow acts (again, how does a racial category, privilege and all, act?) to oppress everyone else. Privilege is a function of a system, not the action of a racial category. The very language of implying action here (referring to whiteness as “it”) removes the structural nature of racism and racial inequities and replaces it with a theory of competing groups.

    Greater analytical clarity would go a long way in reducing the amount of “white people used to be oppressed” kind of response these posts typically get.

45. The posts are unsurprising. If one had been deliberately trying to choose a word which was most likely to cause the type of confusion here (where the “-ness” modifier is not used in its normal manner) then whiteness would have been a good bet. If Renee is going to use that term, mixups are to be expected. Believing that “whiteness” is related to “being white”, “having white skin,” etc would be a normal conclusion.

    If you’re going to go to the trouble of specially defining a non-obvious word, why not choose one which doesn’t cause all that confusion? Just make up the term “fooblebar”, as in “certain white people in power, across the ages, have had a characteristic of ____, which I will refer to as “fooblebar.” 90% of these responses will go away.

46. 1) Whiteness is the recognized term for what it is. Renee isn’t obligated to use a “less confusing” term as a replacement for a perfectly good word that was chosen with care because it was felt to be properly descriptive.

    2) Jeremy, perhaps it might help if you think of Whiteness as a kind of gestalt. Also, white people used to be oppressed too! is a standard response to just about any essay along this axis–It’s part of the mechinism that preserves the naturalness of white privilege. Renee, nor anyone else, was going to avoid having this discussion. It’s part of the tax of talking about sensitive topics.

47. Whiteness IS RELATED TO those who have white skin. They’re just not THE SAME THING.

    And if you come across something you don’t understand…GOOGLE IT. Shit.

48. @Cris T

    I think all the connotations and words are clear to me. Yes, they are. This is not the first discussion about a controversial issue I have joined. 

    “The so-called “ethnic divisions” in Rwanda were CREATED by the French, for god’s sake.”

    How did the French create the divisions? Did they inject the colonized people with some kind of mind altering drugs? Or maybe it’s the famous “chip under the skin” and now the people of Rwanda are unable to stop hating one another?

    What you are showing is a typical example of patronizing that comes from your own subconscious feeling of superiority to sub Saharan Africans. Because I think you feel that, unlike the Rwandans, you obviously would be capable of resisting bad influence of the French if they colonized your country (state, province).

    You put a smile on my face with this comment “… but no matter how far down on the scale your group is in relation to other whites, you’re still considered superior to POC.”

    Say that next time you hear Polish joke and suddenly you’ll become an object of laughter and hear “Polacks are superior to someone? Wow, that’s a good one”

49. JWK, remember that next time you’re not turned away on site for an apartment viewing or job interview.

50. “How did the French create the divisions? Did they inject the colonized people with some kind of mind altering drugs? Or maybe it’s the famous “chip under the skin” and now the people of Rwanda are unable to stop hating one another?”

    Oh dear god, crack a freaking book for once in your life. The “Tutsi” & “Hutu” were categories that the French pretty much imposed on the Rwandans and after decades of systematic colonialist abuse & the privileging of one group over the other, the hatred was established. It’s called “divide and conquer,” have you never heard of that concept before?

    “I think you feel that, unlike the Rwandans, you obviously would be capable of resisting bad influence of the French if they colonized your country (state, province).”

    Find where I said or implied this.

    “Say that next time you hear Polish joke and suddenly you’ll become an object of laughter and hear ‘Polacks are superior to someone? Wow, that’s a good one'”

    And you make me laugh if you’re implying either that a) white racists don’t consider Poles/People of Polish Descent to be superior to POC, or b) that the discrimination Poles/POPD face, however bad, is ANYTHING like as bad as racism. I’m the number one proponent of recognising that there is a lot of oppression of white ethnic groups by other white ethnic groups, but trying to equate that with racism, or use it as an excuse to minimise the effects of racism is despicable.

    “Greater analytical clarity would go a long way in reducing the amount of ‘white people used to be oppressed’ kind of response these posts typically get.”

    Please, please tell me you did not just play the Great White Male kindly using his Superior Intellect to explain to the little WOC how the world works? Please. Listen, a LOT of us get the concept just fine. Those who don’t seem to have a vested interest in denying racism.

    Post-racial society my fat rosy ass.

51. Damn, I wish there were an “edit” button: what I mean re Rwanda is not that different ethnic groups did not exist pre-colonialism. The ethnic categories existed pre-colonisation, but the colonisers applied the labels by using bullsh*t measures of their own divising to categorise people for “official” purposes. And the extremes of hatred were the product of the colonisers’ artificially privileging one group over the other.

52. @whatername

    “… remember that next time you’re not turned away on site for an apartment viewing or job interview.”

    Been there, done that.

    “Do you have computers in Poland?” – I heard sometimes and replied “Yes, we do. Too bad we don’t have electricity to use them.” 🙂

53. @Crys T

    “And the extremes of hatred were the product of the colonisers’ artificially privileging one group over the other.”

    What you are saying is that once a group of people (regardless of how defined) becomes privileged in some way it will defend its special status at all costs. I agree, it was true about European gentry, rubber barons and it is true about communist elites in the few places they are still in power.

    Please, don’t try to tell me that Rwandans before colonization always lived in utopian peace and harmony. I strongly believe that people everywhere are really the same and are capable of unconditional love as much as of extreme violence.

    BTW, it seems like your spelling and mine differ a little bit. We probably live on different sides of the Ocean. :))

54. “don’t try to tell me that Rwandans before colonization always lived in utopian peace and harmony.”

    Because the only 2 possibilities that exist are “utopian peace and harmony” and “war and genocide.” There is nothing else. Right? God, I am so sick of people using these fucking disingenuous tactics, thinking that the rest of us are going to be so stupid that we don’t see the illogic. Either engage your brain when replying to me or I’m through responding to you. I’m sick of wasting my time on people who’s only purpose is to derail and protect their own privilege, and not to participate in dialogue.

    As for us living on different sides of the ocean, I take it from your posts you are European. So am I. And I know that Europeans are just as prone to apologias for racism as any white librul American.

55. JWK: over and over and over and over again? Are you stopped by the police while driving for no reason? What about if you’re walking in an upscale neighborhood?

    You’re bitching about jokes. The racism we’re talking about costs people their lives. Seriously, you don’t see the discrepancy between your comparing racialized jokes with poverty and death? I mean come on.

    And no one’s saying there isn’t prejudice and hasn’t been racism against the so-called “European ethnics”, there is and there has been, but Whiteness has always managed to consolidate itself and make adjustments to the changing times to maintain it’s hegemonic power. And through that, those “Euro ethnics” got absorbed into it, and now, you’re bitching about jokes, and Oscar Grant was shot in the back while lying face down.

56. JWK and others — there are many forms of oppression that are not racism per se, that are often related to race, that white people can be subject to. For instance, classism, nativism/xenophobia, religious prejudice (including anti-Semitism and Islamaphobia) and prejudice against those who speak English as a second language are often directed at people of color, and sometimes directed at white people. Being subject to one of these forms of oppression does not mean you are not a beneficiary of white privilege, and Renee (and other commentators) pointing out your white privilege doesn’t mean that they are disregarding the other forms of prejudice you face — they are just not fully relevant to this particular topic.

57. @Crys T

    “Because the only 2 possibilities that exist are “utopian peace and harmony” and “war and genocide.” There is nothing else. Right?”

    I wish to responded to my stated comment, but instead you choose to continue your ranting.

    I was wondering whether or not there would have been wars, genocide and other forms of violence in sub Saharan Africa if not for the European colonization. What do you think? I don’t want to justify or downplay colonization, just I am curious about your opinion. That’s all. I know it’s a difficult question, but try to answer it, please.

58. “The racism we’re talking about costs people their lives.”

    Exactly. Which is why this is a deadly serious topic that must be discussed. White privilege has to be forced to take the blind-fold off and see itself.

    I never understood how brown skin is such an easy target for all sorts of outrageous abuse by all manner of ordinary people, from minor authorities to any dumb fucker who feels like being an asshole, until I saw the bullshit my husband has had to deal with time and again (mostly in Wisconsin, but also in Ohio and Illinois). And I know that it is only a small fraction of the daily crap so many have to deal with constantly, all over the country and beyond.

    But given that white privilege is so deeply ingrained in the nation (from its earliest days), and the nature of privilege is precisely the opposite of justice, wouldn’t the very nation itself need to be dismantled to achieve a “post racial” society?

59. @LSG

    “… they are just not fully relevant to this particular topic.”

    That’s the problem. The topic narrowed down to make it easy to discuss. Forget the big picture.

    Prejudice, discrimination and injustice come in all shapes and colors. If we eradicated the alleged “white privilege” in America today, would the world be better tomorrow? I doubt anything would change. And all your good work fighting injustice goes down the drain.

    Rather that brag about white hegemony we should try find out why people tend to discriminate others and find a way to stop it.

60. Way to make this thread about YOU JWK and learning nothing.

61. JWK, I value intersectionality, but demands that every post that addresses any kind of oppression be completely “big picture” and address ALL forms of oppression often reflect a desire to focus entirely on oneself, and erase the experience of the person talking.

    Your second paragraph is a little nonsensical. I think you’re saying that as long as humans discriminate against one another in any way, nothing will improve. You may also be saying that forms of oppression overlap to such an extent that isolating one is meaningless — I’m not entirely sure. This seems to me to be a very privileged attitude. Perhaps if we eradicated white privilege today (and frankly, by referring to white privilege is “alleged,” you render your whole comment extremely, extremely suspect) your life would not change dramatically. That isn’t the same thing as nothing changing. The fact that discrimination and injustice would still exist in many, many forms wouldn’t mean that work to end racism would be pointless. The fact that a “big picture” does exist doesn’t mean that specific forms of oppression don’t.

    I can’t wrap my mind around how you parsed “bragging about white hegemony” from the post or any of the comments.

    Finally, it’s very clear to me that with this post Renee is not only trying to find a way to stop discrimination, she is implementing one: opening people’s minds to the reality of other people’s experience is a very important step.

62. LET ME TELL YOU INTERNETS! IT’S HARD TO BE WHITE!!!

63. LET ME TELL YOU INTERNETS! IT’S HARD TO BE WHITE!!!

64. Sorry for the snark, Renee. I just. . .the stupid. IT FUCKING BURNS.

65. “we should try find out why people tend to discriminate others and find a way to stop it.”

    Yeah, because every instance of discrimination is EXACTLY like every other, so looking at different types of discrimination is useless. Again, I call bullshit on what you say: I do not believe for one second that you are interested in looking at the mechanism of discrimination in general. I believe that you just don’t like anyone talking about racism, so you’re trying to shut the conversation down.

66. No, it is not only only one race or ethnic group that has ever before – or now – suffers, or perpetrates injustice. Not only the Romans, or beforehand the Babylonians, or the Greeks. Maybe skip ahead to the era of my own ancestors’ debacles… The Vikings certainly did invade, conquer, rape, pillage, steal, capture, and enslave people from all over western Europe. Don’t forget about the Ottoman Empire. Then we have the glories of the conquistadors, later the British, French, and Spanish colonizations, and on and on it goes. At the same time, we have lovely tales from the far East – say, the Mongolians led by Khan – they certainly wreaked some havoc on their part of the planet. Let us not leave out the Mayans. There is plenty of horrific history to go around, including all “races” and “ethnic groups” enslaving, discriminating against, murdering, and in general engaging in completely immoral behavior both between and within groups. Consider the current horrors in Africa. Maybe there is no corner on evil. Shouldn’t we all try to make the human situation better? Can we not concentrate on the reality now, and what our part in it is?

67. “And how hard is it to understand that she uses “Whiteness” and not “white people” in the same way that feminists use “the patriarchy” and not “men”?”

    In my experience, if men are going to respond negatively to “the patriarchy” , it’s similar to the responses that “whiteness” is getting here — they scoff and say that that entity is imaginary and that this is all being blown out of proportion. I’m impressed when I meet a man who uses the word “patriarchy” without being condescending.

68. @ JKW: When you say, “If we eradicated the alleged “white privilege” in America today, would the world be better tomorrow? I doubt anything would change.”…

    do you really think that? If so, well then, we are witness to your self-interest.

    Things would be better for all the people who suffer, in order for whites to enjoy their privilege. And believe me that privilege is enjoyed at a price.

    But certainly some whites would not experience life as better without it. Especially not those who need to compete on an uneven playing field, who need to tilt things to their favor to ensure their success and “good life.”

69. This thread is making my eyes bleed. Seriously – you understand (and believe in) the concept of male privilege, right? In ‘manliness’, and the culture of masculinity? And you understand that while it can damage men individually, it elevates them collectively? So why is it so hard to believe exactly the same thing applies to race?

    (also: you’re outraged when men deny the existance of male privilege. ‘How the hell can they say that, what do they know??’. So why do you think you have the authority or experience to deny white privilege? Because you don’t see it? Of course you fucking don’t, privilege is invisible from the inside.)

70. @everybody
    It looks like I made some of you very agitated.

    @LSD (or is it LSG?) 🙂
    “…demands that every post […’ address ALL forms of oppression often reflect a desire to focus entirely on oneself, and erase the experience of the person talking.”

    So, in your opinion talking about all forms of opression is actually talking about onself. Interesting.

    @Crys T
    “I believe that you just don’t like anyone talking about racism, so you’re trying to shut the conversation down.”

    Again, why don’t you comment my statement rather than what you believe I want or think. You remind me Robert Gibbs, the White House spokesman, trying to explain Joe Biden’s another blunder “Let me tell you what he meant to say”. Robert, we heard what the v-ce president said. :))

    “The “Tutsi” & “Hutu” were categories that the French pretty much imposed on the Rwandans”

    Did the French somehow altered Rwandans minds and now the can’t figure something had been imposed upon them and they should’t really hate each other? Once the artificial division has been identified it should’t be difficult to end it. Unless someone enjoys the benefits of unearned privilege.

    @laprofe64
    “And believe me that privilege is enjoyed at a price.”

    I know, I talked to people (white) whose poor ancestors came to the USA at the turn of XIX and XX centuries and had to work like dogs 14-16 hours shifts and made just enough money so their families could survive another week, and another. Was it a the expense of POC?

    @everyone
    You can call me stupid, but gues what my response is going to be – Of coure I am stupid. Otherwise we would have never met. Got it. 🙂

    Let me emphasize few details abou myself again:
    As an immigrant, someone who grew up in a completely different and often tragic, environment I still look at many aspects of life in the USA as a spectator not a participant. It allows me to see things from different perspective, not tainted by feeling of victimhood or white guilt.

    I hope you appriciate my maybe unorthodox but honest opinions.

71. OOOps, it’s appreciate not appriciate. Sorry.

72. JWK, you are not reading anything I or anyone else says, you are only repeating your denials of racism. If you have your doubts on these things, like I said, PICK UP A FUCKING BOOK. Until you have, you are trolling. Now fuck off.

73. @Crys T

    What are you talking about? I’ve read all comments to this blog article.

    Search on Amazon for FUCKING BOOK returned 1,887 results.

    This quote from your statement is really meaningfull: “Now fuck off.”

    Is this the best you can do? If you disagree with me tell me where I err.

    Sincerely,
    JWK

74. We’ve ALL been telling you, over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over. And you don’t take any of it on board. You are not here to engage, you are not here to have a conversation. Simply repeating variations, “I don’t believe it,” when faced with facts you do not like is not engaging. It’s trolling.

    If you think I am going to waste my time, searching for link after link after link of material that proves how wrong you are, and put it all in a comment here, only so you can refuse to read any of it and smirk, “I don’t believe it,” you are sadly mistaken.

    It is not the job of anyone here to do your research for you. If you had stopped being a nuisance & done some damn reading on the topic for the length of time you’ve spent here crying about how mean I am to you, you’d know where you err yourself.

    I’m not your damn mother. Learn how to feed yourself.

75. Oh, my, Chrys. It’s International Passive-Aggressive Day and no one told us.

76. @Everyone other than JWK:

    You don’t have to be in the thread three minutes to see how necessary denial is in the maintenance of white — and male — privilege and the related racialized power structure.

    Take a deep breath and disengage from the troll, if you can. I think it’s done its work here.

77. @Crys T

    Oh, please, how many times have I said “I don’t believe.”?

    I see here a lot of talks about how white privilege is enjoyed at the expense of POC and I expressed my dissenting opinion supported by whatever evidence to the contrary came to my mind. That’s all.

78. JWK, I can appreciate your immigrant perspective, as a first-generation American, but understand as well that no immigrant, for however hard he or she may have worked to earn their piece of the “American dream” can enjoy any of it without the price that slaves paid to build this country.

    Without the free labor of blacks in the 19th century, and their continued discrimination, this country would have not been the land of the free and home of the brave to the immigrants that sought a new life here.

    So, YES, it was at the expense of POC that immigrants even had a chance to come here and “work like dogs and survive another week” because the

79. JWK, I can appreciate your immigrant perspective as a first-generation American myself. My parents were both born elsewhere and had to work hard too. They came with nothing too, but the color of their white skin made some things a lot easier for them.

    Still, you need to understand that no immigrant, for however hard he or she may have worked to earn their piece of the “American dream” could have enjoyed any of it without the price that slaves paid to build this country in the first place, and without the price POC continue to pay via discrimination to make this country such a great deal for white immigrants, and a good deal for non-white immigrants.

    Without the free labor of blacks in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries this country would not have been “the land of the free and home of the brave” to the immigrants that sought a new life here. Do you seriously think this country was built on white labor? Think again.

    So, to answer your question: YES, it was at the expense of POC that immigrants even had a chance to come here (that there was even a “here” to come to) and “work like dogs and survive another week” because there is no United States of America without that foundation of free labor, extracted at an unbearable cost to the slaves themselves, and to their descendants.

    The nature of white privilege is exactly that, to exalt the white contribution to the nation and erase that of all others. Slave labor is minimized as something that simply benefited the slave owners –except that some of those very men were the founders of the country, and their wealth, earned FOR them not by them, made this country possible.

    And to the rest, troll or not, everyone deserves to be treated with some respect. Just because someone isn’t on your level of consciousness or hasn’t achieved your level of wisdom regarding these topics, doesn’t mean they aren’t worth the time to respond to with intelligence and patience. To the contrary.

80. PS. Sorry for the computer FAIL and the erroneous first post. My laptop keyboard is off kilter. 🙁

81. @laprofe63
    Thank you for you thoughtful response and the polite manner in which you addressed me. 🙂 This blog seems to be dominated by people who remind me of “apparatchiks” from communist countries – you either agree with them or they declare you an “enemy of the people”.

    Now, if you don’t mind I would like to make a comment to this fragment of your statement “Without the free labor of blacks in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries…”

    I don’t know why some people on this board accuse me of denying the existence of racism and slavery. All I wanted to point out is that slavery was NOT invented in North America. Slavery is a form of serfdom, known in to human kind since the beginning of times and very real in Europe at that time. There were many variations of it in different places at different times and it didn’t end everywhere at the same time. For example in Russia it lasted until mid XIX century.

    European serfs (obviously white) provided free labor to their masters for centuries just like African slaves did in America. In both cases we deal with the same concept and their legal status was similar. Slave owners in America didn’t invent methods to run their plantations; they used the same ones they knew from Europe.

    European ancestors of many white Americans, who might have been serfs, and who provided free labor contributed to the wealth of their countries that allowed the colonization of the New World. Yes, in a sense they also build America without knowing it.

    Did early immigrants live at the expense of black slaves on cotton fields in the South? I doubt. As I said earlier they worked in industry or agriculture, their America and the one black slaved lived in existed in two different hemispheres.

82. @laprofe63

    P.S Computers are evil. They have minds of their own. 🙂

83. @JWK:

    It allows me to see things from different perspective, not tainted by feeling of victimhood or white guilt.

    I don’t think you have ANY cause to wag your finger about being polite when you are so rude and condescending yourself. You are coming across as arrogant. Just because Renee and others hold views that you don’t agree with doesn’t mean that those views are “tainted” by victimhood or white guilt.

    The reason why you got such a nasty reaction from people is because of your tone. Before you start preaching about our behavior, I suggest you check yours.

    @laprof63:

    And to the rest, troll or not, everyone deserves to be treated with some respect. Just because someone isn’t on your level of consciousness or hasn’t achieved your level of wisdom regarding these topics, doesn’t mean they aren’t worth the time to respond to with intelligence and patience.

    First, it is NOT the job of people of color to educate whites about racism. Second, it is hypocritical of a poster to be patronizing and rude and then expect roses and high tea in return. See: “views tainted by victimhood or white guilt.” You get what you give. If you want to be treated with respect, approach people with respect. JWK did not to that, and I find his whining about tone, and your lecture about how we should be nicer to be rather hypocritical.

84. @Sheelzebub

    “you are so rude and condescending yourself”

    Give me examples of my comments you consider rude, please.

    “Before you start preaching about our behavior, I suggest you check yours.’

    Again, help me, please. Did I call anyone stupid? Was it me or someone else who used the expression – fuck off??

85. Give me examples of my comments you consider rude, please.

    Here are two right off the bat–on top of the ones I already pointed out in my original post.

    The author lacks very basic historical knowledge.

    No, you simply disagree with her assessment of history. Patronizing, and a sweeping and insulting generalization.

    As a white male (Eastern European immigrant) I find this article fascinatingly wrong and narrow-minded, and unfortunately a typical left wing mumbo-jumbo.

    So, Renee is narrow-minded, stupid (no you didn’t say stupid, but you’re implying it all over the place) and illogical—”mumbo jumbo” (not to mention “typical left-wing”—quite a bias you have there). Insulting and patronizing to Renee and her perspectives—a Black woman. Who, you seem to infer, does not have your intelligence or dispassion. And by your later comments (which I pointed out in my previous post to you), she is apparently wallowing in victimhood for having a different view from yours (and having that view from her own experiences, which you seem to completely discount while holding your owns as sacrosanct).

    You complain that ChrysT tells you what you meant and what you feel, while you did the exact same thing to her WRT Rwanda. Please. You have quite a double-standard.

    And refraining from telling someone to fuck off doesn’t get you a cookie. Especially when you are being patronizing, rude, and condescending. I mean, seriously? You’re oh-so superior, you have such a dispassionate view, and Renee is simply posting “typical” “left-wing mumbo-jumbo” and she lacks historical knowledge (because her opinion doesn’t jibe with yours).

    My post still stands. You are being rude. You are being condescending and patronizing. You are acting superior and passive-aggressive. You’re being insulting and demeaning. Don’t go crying about how you’re being disrespected when you’re being disrespectful. And no, you don’t have to curse or tell someone to shut up to be disrespectful. You can disagree without deriding the knowledge or intellect of the people you are disagreeing with. You have not done so. Until you do so, and until you apologize to Renee for your own nasty behavior on this thread, I suggest you refrain from lecturing the rest of us about politeness.

86. @Sheelzebub

    Here are two right off the bat–on top of the ones I already pointed out in my original post

    The author lacks very basic historical knowledge.

    No, you simply disagree with her assessment of history.

    It’s not her assessment of history I questioned, it’s this particular fragment of her article that’s historically wrong and that’s what I pointed out:

    Its [whiteness] land has not been colonized, its people have not been murdered and enslaved. Whiteness has never known the sting of existing as a second class citizen, silencing, or being marginalized into obscurity.

    If you start with such bad knowledge of history, your conclusions will be inaccurate.

    Insulting and patronizing to Renee and her perspectives—a Black woman.

    Is questioning an opinion of a black woman against the law now? Are statements made by black women off limits?

    You are being condescending and patronizing. You are acting superior and passive-aggressive. You’re being insulting and demeaning.

    I hardly ever question opinions about me and this one is not an exception. I’ve been called worse in my life. You other comments I simply ignore. Like this one:

    IT FUCKING BURNS.

    But I need some clarification on this one:

    … until you apologize to Renee for your own nasty behavior on this thread, I suggest you refrain from lecturing the rest of us about politeness.

    Are you Renee’s spokesperson or legal representative?

87. Is this forum closed for comments now?

88. Ooops, never mind. My comment didn’t show for a long time and I thought I had been banned. 🙂

89. JWK, you continue to nuke your credibility as the arbiter of manners on this thread.

    After the concept of “whiteness” was explained to you, you refused to acknowledge that Renee had a different view (and experience) from you and that you merely disagreed with her. You said that her knowledge was lacking, and reduced her views to “typical left-wing mumbo-jumbo.” Just because someone doesn’t agree with you doesn’t mean they have a “bad knowledge of history.” And just because someone doesn’t hold your opinions, it doesn’t mean their conclusions are “inaccurate.” You do realize this, don’t you?

    Not a respectful way to debate–so I suggest you not lecture me or anyone else politeness.

    You other comments I simply ignore. Like this one:

    IT FUCKING BURNS.

    Yes, mentioning it in your post is a great job of ignoring it.

    Are you Renee’s spokesperson or legal representative?

    Did I say I was? No, I did not. I did point out that unless you’re going to acknowledge your own less-than-stellar behavior, passive-aggression, and patronizing attitude towards people, not to mention your rude dismissal of those with whom you do not agree (again: “typical mumbo-jumbo” and “wallowing in victimhood”) you should stop lecturing the rest of us on our tone. Your own behavior on this thread has been rude, arrogant, and patronizing, not to mention passive-aggressive.

90. @Sheelzebub

    just because someone doesn’t hold your opinions, it doesn’t mean their conclusions are “inaccurate.”

    I wouldn’t even mention Renee’s opinion if not for her completely false statement that white people have never experienced the pain of violence, enslavement etc. She is wrong and that’s what prompted me to point it out to her.

    I hardly ever question opinions. You call me rude, arrogant, disrespectful, passive-aggressive and more. It’s sad if that’s how I come across to you, but opinions are very personal.

    Laprofe63 described me to other posters as someone who is not on your level of consciousness and hasn’t achieved your level of wisdom. Apparently in his/her opinion I am just not smart enough, I guess not as smart as people who didn’t see shortcomings in Renee’s article. I can live with that. 🙂

    But it doesn’t change the fact that Renee, by omitting some historical facts, can see the world only as either black (good) or white (bad).

91. I particularly agree with the last paragraph. Someone I know once asked if she should colour me in with a black biro when we were doodling in a cafe. I told her to ‘think it through’ – I am not the colour of black ink and thought it was a weird question to ask in that context. Anyway, her response was ‘well, do you think someone who was less touchy would have a problem with my question?’ My respect for her immediately dropped, and probably dropped further when she went on to say “I’d rather race didn’t exist. When I was in South Africa…” She is not racist, exactly, but she doesn’t understand race and how attuned I am, as a black person in the UK, to the thoughtlessness of what some white people say. She couldn’t believe I felt irritated by her comment and attempted to deconstruct it to show how touchy and irrational I was being. Innocent or not, I thought the question was dumb and she totally tried to undermine my right to say so. Annoying as hell.

92. Except, JWK, if you had bothered to read what Renee wrote, you’d see that she was saying that White people were not systematically oppressed for being White. That some whites oppress each other and some white nations have have colonized other white nations does not mean that it is equal with the systematic, institutional colonization of Africa and the enslavement of Black people. But that is NOT the same as the slave trade in North America and Europe. You seem to have a gross misunderstanding of history to even equate the two.

    To ignore what she was actually saying and then dismiss her thoughts as just so much “typical left-wing mumbo-jumbo” and that she’s “wallowing in victimhood” tells me that you’re not interested in hearing what someone of a different race, gender, and background has to say. To then preach to us about listening to you with an open mind when you refuse to do the same is laughable. To then lecture us on civility when you have shown none yourself is hypocritical.

93. @Jay:

    Honestly, I think there’s a school for passive-aggressive behavior out there, and your ‘friend’ graduated with high honors.

94. @Sheelzebub

    White people were not systematically oppressed for being White.

    What difference does it make if you are oppressed? The reason for colonization is always the same, regardless. BTW, there were times when non-white people tried to colonize Europe.

    Parts of Africa have been colonized NOT because of inhabitants’ skin color, but because of natural resources. Why do you think Chinese invest so much in Africa today? Because of oil.

    you’re not interested in hearing what someone of a different race, gender, and background has to say

    The fact that I actually read Renee’s article proves otherwise.

Comments are currently closed.