You're trying very hard to fight for her. Fight the good fight. But it's delusional. She's clearly making a moronic statement. It is stupid on many levels, including rigorous and sociological levels. Many racists, even if they are white, which apparently under your's and her paradigm are the only ones that can be racist, are not in any position of power. If you take some old white, filthy, dirt poor racist, and compare to someone of another "race" in a vastly superior social position and so forth; it seems hard to make the case that the dirty white racist is in a position of power or in any real sense "oppresses" the other person in any other way but in terms of racial hatred.
"Black people CANNOT be racist against White people." Sounds a lot like a free pass to me. If she is using the sociological definition to racism she is taking a narrow-minded approach to a very broad issue to suit her ideals. Claiming this statement as a truth based on one of the many different definitions of racism is naive.
You are not using the same definition of "racism" that they are. "Prejudice + institutional power" is another framing where "racism against white people" is somewhat nonsensical. Why does that quote mean she's racist?
I'm not denying that society is tilted in my favor. That's been clear to me since I was young and had minority scholarships explained to me.
I'm not talking about that, though. I'm saying that she literally says, "All white people are racist." And she means it.
She also literally says that there's no such thing as racism towards white people because it's not racism if that society isn't tilted in their favor.
Yes, I know what "institutional racism" is. I also know what plain old "racism" is. It probably doesn't affect me nearly as much as it does any random minority, but that doesn't mean it isn't racism.
And any racism contributes to racism in general. You can't treat someone like shit and then expect them to treat you better. It's foolish.
No, she said she as a black woman cannot be racist towards white people. On an individual level, sure she could be racist towards a white person. However, the social power imbalance is way against her in almost every way compared to white people with institutions enforcing racist actions and policies against black folks way more often and more severely.
From the wiki: "Some sociologists have defined racism as a system of group privilege."
That i can understand, Its racism. no argument there. So your changing the context of the word so the intent does not matter but the effect does? that's outrageous. Racism is all about the outcome AND intent.
why do all these mental gymnastics just so you can say X cannot be racist towards Y? Why even say something like that? I can't see if having any positive outcome. Its a blanket statement that while maybe true in some situations with your special definition of the word is not true in others. You can find areas of the world where almost any given race has the power/upper hand and are "racist" towards them.
My point is you cannot simply say X cannot be racist towards Y because it can, has and will happen and all levels. Sure you can limit your definition of the word racist and redefine it but really whats the point?
Either at an individual level, a social group level (X friends won't be friends with Ys) or a social/society level anyone race CAN be racist towards another. They may not be in a given situation/area/whatever crazy limitations you wanna make, but there is nothing inherently special about any race making them immune from being racist, we are all human regardless of race and we have to work together to stamp it out and statements such as hers do not exactly help at all. I'm not sure what point she was trying to make, or even you honestly, but it would be better to phrase it in a way that does not use the term racist and redefine it so people can say such inflammatory things. Notice how pretty much no one gets it, most disagree with it and it flames hate? That's not a way to fix racism.
What's the damage? The damage is that racism is evil irrespective of who the racist is (and yes, black people can be racist too, as any reputable dictionary should be able to prove to you). And every instance of it should be denounced, especially the more egregious ones like this one.
You can say, there's no problem, she doesn't have any power. I would counter that it's not true. These people have large followings and many apologists (like yourself). And even if it were true that she had no power, her hate should be confronted. People should learn the limits of good behavior in civilized society.
You say this is not about instilling guilt, because the author said so. I will put it to you that even if it was not her intention (and I'm not so sure about that), it might still end up happening (if you want to understand the kind of effect such accusations, even when only implied, can have on people, read [http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=2119]). When I read "you are the problem" it sure sounds like an accusation to me (and a pretty serious one at that). And this accusation is surely bigoted when you apply it indiscriminately to a whole class of people.
I spent a considerable amount of time studying the existential feminism of Simone de Beauvoir; not sure that matters here. I think it's simpler than you claim! I wasn't aware Adria Richard's ridiculous tweet had such intellectual depth.
My example was not that the rich guy was the racist; it was that the dirty white guy was the racist but that he had no oppressive power, in a meaningful sense other than the actual bigotry, over the rich guy, as you put it.
Adria Richards was not making as far reaching statements as you claim. This was not an epistle on sociological performances. This was a statement that "X" group "CANNOT" be racist. I understand the position you want to make, and claiming "the experts on this stuff" doesn't really impress me. I am not denying any such concepts as institutional racism or anything of the kind. You can have all the racial performances you want, that's fine. But the idea that X group cannot be racist is just stupid. The idea that only one group can ever be in a position of power is flawed and "position of power" does not only have to refer to status in society as a whole but can be applied to particular communities and so on and so forth.
Novacole is not saying violence and hatred toward white people is okay. The poster is distinguishing between prejudice and the term racism. Racism has a power component. Powerless people cannot make another race face racism as a group because they do not have the societal power to effect laws, police, institutional behavior.
To insist that the "prejudice + power" argument is premised on bright-line "race == power" is to mischaracterize it to the point of being unrecognizable.
It's about relative power. If I'm black, and your boss, and have a prejudice against your race, I can be racist. If I'm black, have no meaningful kind of power over you, and have a prejudice against your race, I'm just prejudiced.
That's the position. This "ALL" lunacy is a multiple fallacies in one, and it remains a bitter disappointment to see a crowd of people who otherwise pride themselves aloud on being so smart, buy into it so unexaminedly.
I think what people are truly angry about is when someone is racist (to be clear I'm using the definition involving prejudice based on race) towards someone who is of a generally privileged class (i.e. white) and when this is pointed out sometimes the answer is is that they're not being racist because their definition of it is also related to power. And so both parties are drawn into the argument over language semantics. However, it is the wrong argument to be involved in, because it is correct to point out the hypocrisy: it is not ok to be racist (using the definition without power) to anyone, regardless if in general they benefit from their race.
So you have nothing to validate your claims. You can’t help but to reject any vision that you don’t understand because you know how racism “really works”, and you aren’t willing to have a discussion of real problems. Enjoy living in your bubble, ignoring the suffering of so many just because they aren’t the ones that you believe to be the victims. If there were only people like you in the world, we’d still have slavery and women still wouldn’t vote. Maybe some day you’ll be able to understand that.
You don’t know the “typical case.” No one does. We can’t. We don’t have the data. You’re making assumptions about what racism “really is”. Racism occurs on a personal basis. Anyone can be a victim to it. And no ones victimhood can nor should be waved off from an outsider who doesn’t understand, or equally who’s willing to say “nah doesn’t count.”
And your last paragraph you dare to insinuate that my suffering, or more to the point I’m making - other people who’s suffering is similar to mine - is just solved by helping those who inflicted this upon me. Well if that’s the case, and under your view minorities suffer at the hands of whites, it only makes sense that since whites are at the top of this hierarchy that we ought to just help whites out because then everything else in the chain follows! We help whites with whatever causes them to inflict pain on the minorities, and then the minorities will be saved as well as the victims of the minorities.
But I bet you don’t see it that way. I bet this logic of “disregard whites” is going to be defended no matter what mental gymnastics it requires. No matter how I apply your own logic against itself, I bet you’ll come to the same conclusion and you’ll still try to convince me that helping all humans who suffer is impossible or untenable or even just down right immoral.
I’ve lived with people telling me this all my life. From my oppressors to privileged folks who have never experienced an ounce of racism in their life - they all tell me my struggles don’t matter and only the people that they consider to be victims matter. It’s sad. It’s sad that the same propaganda that led us to chaining up blacks and suppressing the rights of women and minorities is still alive and well. It’s sad that we can’t seem to learn this lesson. But this is what humans are. Our dissonance masks reality from us. We allow suffering for our own convenience. And that probably won’t ever change.
I'm going to be very direct with you as I believe it's been a long time since anyone has treated you like an adult.
> I donate my time to arts programs for people with developmental and intellectual disabilities, and I also engage in anti-racist action and combat racism and misogyny in my daily life when I'm able to. I'm not really asking for legal privilege or power from you, not sure where that came from...Or it could be because there's just racism everywhere?
You're playing identity politics and inventing racism and misogyny in order to have something to "combat." If you're just looking to be offended for the sake of community, you're free to do so, but don't confuse this with social progress.
> racism against white people is theoretically possible...This conversation and many that I've had before are depressing, because for me at least they constitute a denial of solid sociology and anthropology on the level of conservative climate denial...I think the question with white supremacy should not be whether or not exists...Like global warming, it's well-documented and blatant enough that I'm flabbergasted when people ask me to prove it.
You're trying to weasel out of this conversation by blowing out the scope to confuse yourself and others into thinking you had a cogent point or substantial argument. Anyone that lets you re-frame an argument so that you can feel like you've won is doing you a massive disservice by patronizing you.
It's obvious that it's more important for you to feel like you've had a moral victory than it is for you to understand what you're talking about.
> I really need to learn to stop engaging with people like you...I realize at this point that I'm definitely not reaching you and that you probably don't want to be reached. I'm sorry I tried, it seems like it was a waste of time.
If you want to apologize, do so to yourself for getting wrapped up in such nonsense and for allowing yourself to be manipulated out of critical thinking.
Calling out racism does not make one a racist, for sure. Labeling anyone who disagrees with her a racist, without even a slightly plausible evidence, makes her a racist because all she can see is race. You're right that that's not the standard definition of racism. It's a fair game, though, as people like Gebru pretty much uses racism as a weapon however they like.
In my view a huge part of the problem is that we keep giving bad people a benefit of the doubt they don't deserve, and keep treating bad faith nonsense as arguments worthy of consideration. In my view I am not making a "personal attack" so much as calling a spade a spade.
To be clear: I believe OP is not just ignorant, but is being a bad person. OP's point was not simply that anti-black discrimination is no big deal - which would be reprehensible enough - but that the opposite is happening, to the detriment of whites. It doesn't matter if OP is parroting racist propaganda or creating it themselves: it is highly potent racist propaganda, designed to convert whites into overt racists by playing on their resentment.
OP isn't "less racist" if they sincerely believe the propaganda due to misinformation: racism is racism and OP is perpetuating it. "Just because he's repeating a racist lie does NOT mean he is a racist" is unfortunately a common line of thought in the US. But this only assuages the feelings of whites, and does not accurately describe racism in America.
I think you make a good point. Racism is prejudice and power. Power to institutionally marginalize a racial group. It is meaningless to call racist an oppressed racial group that is institutionally powerless. Some reactionary people like to confuse the issue with calls of reverse racism by oppressed nation people.
What? People shouldn't have to be "aware of her definition of racism" because her definition of racism isn't the definition of racism. I might as well lament your ignorance for not being familiar with a word I made up 5 minutes ago...
Imagine your mom is racist. Will you go to each and every house on her street telling everyone not to talk to this racist bitch who is not willing to admit she's wrong? Or you will spend time after time after time leaving no avenue unexplored trying to see what is she coming from and why is she wrong?
What I have been noticing is that a large number of people seem to be redefining "racism" and "racist".
"Or even worse, we’re told that we are being racist (Does any intelligent person actually believe a systematically oppressed demographic has the ability to oppress those in power?)"
People are adding the requirement that to be racist or racism that an oppression element must coexist with the thought or behavior[1][2]. That's not completely true. An element of superiority or inferiority must exist. An oppressed person can still be racist is they believe they are superior to their oppressors.
The comment from the story above turns people off and away from hearing what is being said because it is offensive and a fallacy.
EDIT: formatting
EDIT: Clarification "(Does any intelligent person actually believe a systematically oppressed demographic has the ability to oppress those in power?)" No. But you're conflating two issues; thinking of oneself superior to another based on race and oppression. One can be racist without [directly] oppressing others. In fact, that's what the article is trying to point out.
[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=racism
the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
reply