Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I think what you are missing is that people -- in particular, white people, but really all people -- do an awful lot to perpetuate racism even if they don't personally act out of or harbor what you would call racist views. Societal structures are not made of stucco or brick -- they are people, acting consciously. They may not realize that they are perpetuating racism, but they are.

Someone who is willing broadly to accept that societal structures, broadly, are racist but who disagrees that he or she is personally involved in that is someone who is in denial and who will be part of the problem, not part of a solution.

There's a semantic bridge you're attempting to cross which no one ever will.

Call someone a racist and you have accused him of something personally. Say to someone, "you are part of a racist system" and you are accusing someone of being part of something so big that he may not fully realize how and to what extent he is perpetuating that system. (And really, there is no way to ever know that answer.)

I think certain people want the license to call others "racist" because it gets the point across as brutally as possible. I understand the desire to do that. But a lot of the racist impacts of a racist society are caused by people who have no idea they are supporting racist societal structures. Saying, "you're a racist" to these people confuses them, or offends them. In either case, no constructive dialogue is had.

But if you say, "society is racist and you're part of society, so you're part of this system," people are forced to think. And if you get them thinking, rather than deflecting, you're already engaged in a constructive dialogue. If they think honestly about it, they'll realize the statement is true.

Sometimes, brevity is not the best way to convey a point. I've personally used the "racist system" explanation with diehard old, white Republicans and they'll grudgingly say, "I see that." Call one of them a racist and they'll dig in and fight. Even I will still dig in and fight if you call me racist. Why? Because it's a lazy way to say a more complex thing. And it's often employed by people who like its shock value. Even as a purveyor of hyperbole and an aficionado of provocateurs, I can't abide it. It's too obvious a bait, too transparent an attempt to create a linguistic knockout punch.

And the silly argument that to bristle at it is to prove white fragility insults my intellect. I'm happy to engage insult and hyperbole all day long. I actually enjoy it. But it had better be really well crafted, and not the sort of thing a sophomoric sort could wield as a cudgel.

Many people use the term in good faith. I think the people here do so generally. But among the pundits, and in the internet circles where this stuff is discussed, the term is defaulted to by people who think it's the debate equivalent of a .44 Magnum. They overuse it, and what's overused inevitably loses all bite.

Safire would agree with me.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

There's a semantic bridge you're attempting to cross which no one ever will.

Call someone a racist and you have accused him of something personally. Say to someone, "you are part of a racist system" and you are accusing someone of being part of something so big that he may not fully realize how and to what extent he is perpetuating that system. (And really, there is no way to ever know that answer.)

I think certain people want the license to call others "racist" because it gets the point across as brutally as possible. I understand the desire to do that. But a lot of the racist impacts of a racist society are caused by people who have no idea they are supporting racist societal structures. Saying, "you're a racist" to these people confuses them, or offends them. In either case, no constructive dialogue is had.

But if you say, "society is racist and you're part of society, so you're part of this system," people are forced to think. And if you get them thinking, rather than deflecting, you're already engaged in a constructive dialogue. If they think honestly about it, they'll realize the statement is true.

Sometimes, brevity is not the best way to convey a point. I've personally used the "racist system" explanation with diehard old, white Republicans and they'll grudgingly say, "I see that." Call one of them a racist and they'll dig in and fight. Even I will still dig in and fight if you call me racist. Why? Because it's a lazy way to say a more complex thing. And it's often employed by people who like its shock value. Even as a purveyor of hyperbole and an aficionado of provocateurs, I can't abide it. It's too obvious a bait, too transparent an attempt to create a linguistic knockout punch.

And the silly argument that to bristle at it is to prove white fragility insults my intellect. I'm happy to engage insult and hyperbole all day long. I actually enjoy it. But it had better be really well crafted, and not the sort of thing a sophomoric sort could wield as a cudgel.

Many people use the term in good faith. I think the people here do so generally. But among the pundits, and in the internet circles where this stuff is discussed, the term is defaulted to by people who think it's the debate equivalent of a .44 Magnum. They overuse it, and what's overused inevitably loses all bite.

Safire would agree with me.

Thank you for proving my points, but it really didn't need that many words. White people like you don't want to hear that they do racist stuff, and resist it by saying that racism is something that other people are, but that they are not. They may not realize that they are perpetuating racism, but they are. Someone who is willing broadly to accept that societal structures, broadly, are racist but who disagrees that he or she is personally involved in that is someone who is in denial and who will be part of the problem, not part of a solution.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Thank you for proving my points, but it really didn't need that many words. White people like you don't want to hear that they do racist stuff, and resist it by saying that racism is something that other people are, but that they are not. They may not realize that they are perpetuating racism, but they are. Someone who is willing broadly to accept that societal structures, broadly, are racist but who disagrees that he or she is personally involved in that is someone who is in denial and who will be part of the problem, not part of a solution.

And by "a solution," I do not mean trying to convince the rest of society that the word "racist" should only be used to describe someone who is conscious of his or her bigotry.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Thank you for proving my points, but it really didn't need that many words. White people like you don't want to hear that they do racist stuff, and resist it by saying that racism is something that other people are, but that they are not. They may not realize that they are perpetuating racism, but they are. Someone who is willing broadly to accept that societal structures, broadly, are racist but who disagrees that he or she is personally involved in that is someone who is in denial and who will be part of the problem, not part of a solution.

What racist stuff do I do? Or, what racist stuff do you do?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

What racist stuff do I do? Or, what racist stuff do you do?

I'm not playing this game where we pretend to talk about this issue but each of us use the same words to mean different things so that we can talk past each other.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I'm not playing this game where we pretend to talk about this issue but each of us use the same words to mean different things so that we can talk past each other.

Smh

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Smh

How are you racist? What racist acts or thoughts do you engage in every day? Ty’s ducking. What say you?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

How are you racist? What racist acts or thoughts do you engage in every day? Ty’s ducking. What say you?

I was SMH'ing Ty saying he refuses to engage in you two talking past each other. But the next time I see myself doing something I'll mention it.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Smh

So much hate indeed.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

So much hate indeed.

I am still interested in hearing some of the examples of acts or omissions in which you, me, or Hank engage in every day which are racist. Just some examples. That’s all.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I'm not playing this game where we pretend to talk about this issue but each of us use the same words to mean different things so that we can talk past each other.

Nihil dicit.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Call one of them a racist and they'll dig in and fight. Even I will still dig in and fight if you call me racist. Why? Because it's a lazy way to say a more complex thing.

This is your major problem. If you can't hear someone when they say something you've done is racist and all you hear is someone calling you a racist and thus, a bad person, you have taken a word that has a complex meaning and rendered it useless. If (for one example), when it comes to black women, you think only like light-skinned black women with European features are attractive, that is objectively racist. I should be able to say that to you without you shutting down and telling me how you can't control who you're attracted to or that you have black friends or that race never entered into your head or that you can't be racist because you had a black girlfriend. The fact that you have been conditioned to prefer a European beauty ideal doesn't make you Steve King. But it is indeed racist.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

And the silly argument that to bristle at it is to prove white fragility insults my intellect. I'm happy to engage insult and hyperbole all day long. I actually enjoy it. But it had better be really well crafted, and not the sort of thing a sophomoric sort could wield as a cudgel.

Again, this paragraph shows that you. do. not. listen.

The concept of White Fragility isn't meant to be a fucking insult. It means when it comes to this specific topic, because applying the term "racism" to any of your actions carries with it the idea that you are a bad person, you no longer listen to why whatever action at issue is wrong or hurtful (even if it is what I referred to in the previous email as Low Level Racism). Your sole focus is proving that you are not a bad person. And since we all have to deal with that, we never get back to why that initial action is wrong and how you can correct it.

I would like to explain to people I've come across who have said, "She's cute for a black girl," why that is racist. It's clearly not the same as saying, "Niggers disgust me." But if I can't even talk to them about the former they are fucking fragile--meaning, their feelings take over a conversation in which they can be educated. That's not meant to be an insult.

TM