User loginLive Discussions
Google searchMost popular threads
Weekly Archives
Blog linksAfrican American Political Pundit |
Tip jarThe Public LibraryReality checksNews sourcesLink CollectionsDropping KnowledgeLibrary of Congress African American Odyssey Who's new
Who's onlineThere are currently 3 users and 11 guests online.
Online users
...Syndicate |
Introspective thought of the daySubmitted by Prometheus 6 on September 6, 2005 - 8:28pm.
on Hurricane Katrina | Random rant Reflecting on my reaction to far too many white people's reaction to New Orleans Desire deflects intent
Those picture out of NOLA hit the same nerve attack dogs and firehoses hit in the 60s. But we have more history...and I can see some white folks becoming a problem.
No.
As an individual, no. As an instance of a class, yes...and the more so the larger the class, and the class is getting larger as we speak. Read. Type. Whatever. And I mention it because I want you to acknowledge a class of white people that reflexively see Black people as a threat exists...I thank you...and to ask what can be done about it. Understand the problem is not Black people's behavior again but that behavior which is ascribed to us. I want you to acknowledge a class of white people that reflexively see Black people as a threat exists Ok, as you predicted, I so acknowledge. ask what can be done about it Why does anything need to be done about it? I mean, such people don't listen to me any more than they listen to you, but they don't have a significant audience either. Why can't we write them off as morons and pay attention to things which actually matter? Understand the problem is not Black people's behavior again but that behavior which is ascribed to us. Suggesting that someone isn't worthy of attention doesn't much rise to expressing criticism.
BECAUSE THEY VOTE.
True again, and I'm asking you why that's all you do. If you're really interested in civil society. True again, and I'm asking you why that's all you do. Let's line up the comments a bit, I think maybe I wasn't clear.
I wasn't suggesting that black people's behavior was a problem. I wasn't criticizing black people. I didn't understand if maybe someone else was who wasn't here, but it wasn't me. I know. I'm saying you see there's a problem with white people's behavior and suggest it isn't worthy of attention.
You refuse...again...to criticize, and I'm asking why. And when you get around to answering that, my next question is how or whether you think you would be affected if anti-Black racism and the annoyance at white folks Black folks constantly feel over it, were genuinely resolved. But don't answer that until you answer the first one. You refuse...again...to criticize, and I'm asking why. Fine. I have no problem criticizing her. To the extent that I react to what she says, my reaction is critical; she's speaking without evidence, or even an appeal to common sense. But my first reaction is "unthinking person who isn't much interested in communication, so I'm not going to waste my time or energy on her". I recommend that you think like me (semi-joke). The world is full of such people. Some of them are white, some are black. They're a waste of time, not some incarnation of evil. On the other hand, I'm not going to spend much energy confronting you if you do take her on, have at her if you think it will do some good. Maybe while you're on the case you could do something about those people with bumper stickers that go "God said it, I believe it, and that settles it".
There's plenty of competition for the worst bureaucratic bullshit, so maybe this one isn't the worst, but it's up there. There has now arrived plenty of credible evidence that the Red Cross was ready, willing, and able to deliver food, water, blankets, and toiletries to both the Superdome and the convention center, even as the first refugees were arriving, but was denied the opportunity by the State of Louisiana, who didn't want these sites to seem too attractive.
I'm talking about people who actively obstruct Black folks. Folks like NRO, who present nasty rumors as fact. The Kouncil of Konservative Kitizens and the politicians that are supported by them. The class that woman is a member of isn't an economic or social class. Members of her class exist at all levels of society. All this has direct impact on race relations in this country. It's the cause of ALL race problems...Black people have never been the ones to resist integration...it's only been a decade or two that Black folks even began resisting assimilation! Do you think we need to solve this country's race problems, DW? And do you think it can be done without white people changing in any way? Do you think we need to solve this country's race problems, DW? I think we need to go step by step P6. I suggest that the first step of a solution is understanding. You can look at a thousand online forums p6, and not find what's going on on your fourm. You can find black people talking to white people all right. But they're mostly either too friendly to take on the real issues, or they're too hostile to make any progress. I think we've made progress, and recently so. Consider an abstract black man and an abstract black man (not you, not me, not anyone we know). We knew all along they had a tension between them. Now we've put some understanding to that barrier. Consider their experience. The black man experiences the white man making life more difficult. The black man experiences this as unfair, and reasonably experiences the white man as an unjust, unfair example of humanity. The white man experiences life as basically fair, but maybe cutting some slack for the black man. He doesn't in any way experience participation in any anti-black thing. Now when these two men try to communicate, things go predictably wrong. The black man is hopeful that the white man will just fess up to what he has done, and agree to not do that kind of thing again. The white man is pissed off that the black man is making wild accusations, or at least being a whiner about how unfair life is. We can improve on the explanation, but something like that is why perfectly rational black and white people cannot have a truly friendly relationship. The experiences are real.
I think we need a destination before we take another step. Understand, my friend...we taught you the things you just explained to me. I'm not asking you for proof, just an opinion. I already know you think Black people need to change. I believe you think Black people are the only people who need to change. That does not parse. Such an attitude is not of necessity racist, [NOTE TO BLACK FOLK: I'm using the mainstream definition of racism here, not the real one] but it's still one I have no interest in supporting. I believe you think Black people are the only people who need to change. What did I say which led you to believe that?
It's that you're full of discipline for Black people and full of excuses for white people. So do you think we need to resolve the country's race problems? It's that you're full of discipline for Black people and full of excuses for white people. Nowhere in my explanation did I propose discipline or make excuses. I proposed that there exist profoundly different perspectives, so different that it's unusual to contemplate life from the other one, but that if we're to progress, we need to do just that. I think it's a symmetric prescription. So do you think we need to resolve the country's race problems? I'll feel successful if I can just be a little closer to my black friends.
I'm looking at your pattern, the image of yourself you've created with your assertions and actions. "Excuses" was the word that occurred to me...most recent case is your suggestion that the class of people who reflexively hate Black folk should just be allowed to go there way. So do you think we need to resolve the country's race problems? So you don't think the nation's race problems need to be resolved as long as you can understand and deal with your Black friends a bit better. Fair statement? So you don't think the nation's race problems need to be resolved as long as you can understand and deal with your Black friends a bit better. Fair statement? It's not that I shrink from the goal of solving the nation's race problems, I believe that what would be good for you and me would likely be good for most people. Rather it's that I'm realistic about how many people will listen no matter how well thought out what you or I say. I do suggest that important progress is likely to happen person by person, as compared to being taught in school or codified into law or something else of an institutional nature.
I thought you advocated principle over politics. I'm the one who is asking...one who you must already know will see the country's race problems as issues needing resolution. There was a time I thought white folks of good will could conduct other white folks into the light. The anti-political correctness forces quickly disabused me of that notion. And that's why, in general, I don't try to make white folks comfortable as I explain stuff to Black folks. A lot of our conversation over the last few days has been an extended response to your observation that we don't make a case white folks will find "compelling." I needed to show you that even the most rational, thinking white person cannot simply say the races problems in the USofA need just resolution. You are a rational, thinking white person, right? Hence, on the chance I haven't lost cnulan, the Murkan Meta. If you try to explain such stuff you launch into the Eternal War. Much simpler (if a bit more time intensive) to bring it about and point it out. "I needed to show you that even the most rational, thinking white person cannot simply say the races problems in the USofA need just resolution." Yep. It was just like attending science class and watching a chemistry experiment. That's why I have no more use for "white" liberals than I do for "black" conservatives. They are equally confused or in denial about racism and its pervasive role in American culture. Give me a rabble-rousing, wild-eyed, take-no-prisoners "white" radical like John Brown any day.
But hold the firearms. With all due respect, QB, for your Quaker beliefs, I am not a pacifist. I'm not a pacifist either...but the house is on fire, know what I'm saying? So do you think we need to resolve the country's race problems? This has been going a bit wrong here, P6. You ask a question, and I look at it and I'm not sure just what it is you're asking. So I answer a nearby question, hoping that might be what you're asking, or if not, you'll provide directions to what you want. A couple of iterations, and then you assert that either I can't answer or I'm refusing something. That's not what is happening. Do I think we need to resolve the country's race problems? Hell yes I think we need to resolve the country's race problems. Now what did I say? The devil is in that word "need". As a country, we need to do lots of things. We need to reduce our dependence on oil. We need to reduce our trade deficit. And so on. But while I have no problem saying we need these things, they're impersonal to me. I don't feel personally empowered to do anything other than vote, even thought I care. So I was hoping you were asking that question in a more personal way. Where the "we" consisted of you and I and other P6 posters. I was searching for an interpretation of your question I could answer personally.
You are a rational, thinking white person, right? Yes I am. To simplify the issue even further, consider this. Blacks experiece racism. Whites do not experience racism. Blacks, extrapolating from their experience, believe whites are experiencing racism. Whites, extrapolating from their experience, believe blacks are not experiencing racism.
[This was added later]Go back over the thread, tell me which question I asked you didn't understand. I'm sorry, I'm not the person you can claim is indirect or unclear. If you were actually unsure of what I was asking, you are the only one.
Shall we define "is" next?
Whether you use Black people's understanding of the word "racism" (a consciously created systemic bias against Black people) or white people's (making any reference to race at all) that does not parse. Whether you use Black people's understanding of the word "racism" (a consciously created systemic bias against Black people) It's totally consistent with that.
We do not believe white people experience a systemic bias against Black people. We see white people "Exhibit " does not mean "conscious." We are totally aware racism is often unconscious, reflexive, and that white people may be totally unaware of it in themselves. To the point: the error is in assumng our experiences are interchangeable. To the point: the error is in assumng our experiences are interchangeable. Our experiences aren't even slightly interchangeable, which is why we have such a hard time understanding what is going on.
So stop trying to shoehorn them into the same shaped boxes. DW, I feel you are a more than reasonable person. You've spoken with rare honesty at times, and I really don't get any animus from you at all. But though you acknowledge racism is still an issue, you approach every race problem with the "innocent until proven guilty beyond any doubt" approach, just as the overwhelming majority of white people do...and doubt about the motives of a human is always possible. White people have a reflexive response to ANY white person being accused of racism. What white people do not perceive is a conscious bias...they see it as knowledge. And because they do not see themselves as biased and because they identify absolutely with other white people in this regard, they assume there is no bias against Black folk. We are totally aware racism is often unconscious, reflexive, and that white people may be totally unaware of it in themselves. But, as was finally pounded into me, such awareness is more abstract than experienced. We're quite familiar with unconscious doings, but we're far less familiar with unconscious doings which seem conscious.
So you tell me...is this level of pounding the only way to make your average white person more conscious? Because if it is, then Black people's best sociopolitical move is to just take it into account. Which is actually the position held by great numbers of Black folks nowadays. But though you acknowledge racism is still an issue, you approach every race problem with the "innocent until proven guilty beyond any doubt" approach, just as the overwhelming majority of white people do...and doubt about the motives of a human is always possible. I agree there are some white people who are conscious racists, P6; the guy on the bus seems to quaifiy. Those aren't the ones I'm inerested in here in this discussion. I'm not saying they don't matter, I am saying that whatever the solution is for those white people, it's probably not the solution for the rest of us, and vice versa. I don't think the innocent-guilty axis captures the range here. The other day Jesse Jackson complained that describing those evacuated from New Orleans as "refugees" was racist. Ok, I'm guilty. I did that. Other white people did too. Guilty as can be. Unconscious, but guilty of racism. Progress? Are we really investigating guilt vs innocence?
We? No. But every time we try to address it, we are accused of racism. We are told "I didn't own slaves." But you DO have equity in the nation that created a self-perpetuating system of racism, and as such you hold debt as well. Every time we try to deal with the collective issues we get complaints of personal innocence. Every time we try to deal with the collective issues we get complaints of personal innocence. Does it help that I personally confess to calling those evacuated "refugees"?
No. I don't want to hear personal at all when the problem is a collective one. Your perfect liver dies when your malfunctioning heart finally kills your whole body. I suspect white people in general would confess to using "refugees". Would that help? Does calling evacuees "refugees" have anything at all important to do with the problem?
What do you think?
Remember, I'm the guy who isn't stuck on any specific word. The refugee thing is just an indicator. I think Bush referring to everyone as "people in this part of the world" is even more telling. Psychologically he had severed the area from the country. What do you think? I think it wouldn't help a thing, but I think it's your call. I do believe it's an interesting example, because it concisely illustrates the lack of experience by whites. Whites, myself included, use "refugee" as a commone English term for someone who has been forced from their ordinary living arrangement and is in need of help. We don't experience any infliction of racism when using the term. Jesse Jackson, on the other hand, experiences racism when he hears that. Given the reality of that experience, that makes whites guilty of racism. Ok, let's say we all white people agree, we're guilty of racism by using "refugee". The problem is that there's a disconnect between that and "life is tougher for blacks because of racism". Nobody's going to buy a claim that whites using "refugee" makes life tougher for blacks. We've (apparently) diluted the meaning of "racism" so far that it isn't very important. We've gotten all whites to plead guilty to being racists, but it didn't help.
Guilt? Did I say I cared about guilt?
Would you believe it's a part of a problematic pattern of behavior? When was the last time Americans displaced within the country were called "refugees?" Four hurricanes in Florida last year, any refugees? Oops...Bush sent FEMA to Florida well in advance of those hurricanes, set things up for Floridian voters really nice. Need another example... The San Francisco earthquake. Any refugees? It's the pattern that makes things difficult. Without the pattern, we'd just punch out racists as we find them. Four hurricanes in Florida last year, any refugees? I don't recall any, same as I don't know of any current ones from Mississippi, where the hurricane hit directly (although there probably were/are some in both cases). The thing which created refugees was the semi-permanent flood, and the current forced evacuation, not the hurricane. I don't recall 1906 very well. We need a different example to illustrate the pattern.
Guilt? Did I say I cared about guilt? I was replying to this:
How should I proceed? Is responding as I have been off the point?
Okay.
Just a little. After all, I did say we are not investigating guilt or innocence. And you never did answer this one.
So you tell me...is this level of pounding the only way to make your average white person more conscious? If it is, then it's not a solution, because it's too easy to avoid. I did say we are not investigating guilt or innocence. I think we need a spectrum with "refugee" at one extreme, and unconsciously failing to seriously consider any black job candidate at the other extreme. You might change my mind, but I really feel that the refugee issue is quite negative in its effect, by sucking attention away from, and diluting the analysis of important things.
Well, is it? Well, is it? It's not a solution in and of itself. I believe that any actual solution will be based on white people having at least a vague, but accurate understanding of black experience, and black people having at least a vague, but accurate understanding of white experience. The solution will drop any requirement that the other side must act and react in a way inconsistent with their personal and racially shared experience. We're in a chicken/egg dilemma, with both sides demanding change which is in fact inconsistent with experience. Whites demand blacks cease being concerned about racism because it isn't happening (because they know it isn't happening). Blacks demand whites cease being racists, because they know it is happening. That deadlock has existed for 35 years now. So convincing whites that blacks are experiencing important racism is an important, and required step, but in and of itself it is insufficient, because, confusing as it might sound, that does not provide the basis for any real change. Whites will continue as they have, not experiencing any such thing, and blacks will continue to resent the hegemony, sometimes expressing that resentment, sometimes not. I really don't get any animus from you at all. I just want to express how pleased I am to hear that. I was going to let it go by, but let's be real, I want you to know me like that, and it's rewarding to hear you say so.
Actually, it does. Do you know how "The Big Lie" works? It works with the truth, too. And it's important because you really can't solve a problem when you start with the wrong premise
...and it's pretty obvious who is wrong.
Actually, it does. Take on the real issue here P6. That's why I bring up the refugee thing. I understand that Jesse Jackson experiences racism when he hears me use "refugee". I think about it, and while I don't wish Jesse any more pain, I decline to change my behavior, because I don't experience any racism in it at all, even after I'm informed about Jesse. If he was my friend, I wouldn't use refugee around him of course, but it would be as a personal favor, not because I was reforming. When you ask me to not use refugee as an example of ceasing racist behavior which is making life tough for black people, you ask me to deny my experience. Real progress would have two parts to that equation. 1. The explanation of racist behavior 2. The white person being able to empathize with the pain, as compared to simply knowing it exists. ...and it's pretty obvious who is wrong. Does my continued use of refugee, because I can't empathize with the pain, put me into your obviously wrong category? [I'll add one thing about refugee. My use here is for discussion. I'd not use it around my black friends, without being asked, but I wish such things weren't between us.]
Excuse me? You want to discuss the passing triviality of word choice while I'm discussing behavior, and you think you've got the 'real issue"? If you want to tell me this refugee thing is bullshit as racism, it'll be over in a heartbeat, and we will have made progress into a zone where every black person on television claiming racism isn't really behaving in the interests of black people overall. Some do, some don't, fine with me. A real issue is behavior which cause blacks to suffer the pain of racism while whites, even whites who are trying and want to, can't empathize. This happens every day, and it solidifies black resentment of whites; it's worth understanding. The reason the whites can't empathize is because they have experiences which they map to what they believe the black experience is. In these experiences, they conclude "sometimes people do things you don't like, but you have to pick an appropriate reaction, and an appropriate reaction seldom includes condemnation of the person doing what you don't like". If we're to get past that, we need to connect the behavior to the pain in a way which rises to a level which implies personal condemnation.
I'm telling you that you know too much at this point to even be having this bullshit conversation with me. Explain please? Re-read the thread. Time to back off. I understand P6, that your analysis of this is totally consistent with your past experiences. I hope you accept that my analysis is equally consistent with my experiences. That we come to a gap is predictable, our experiences are different. I don't understand the gap well, but I do know it's smaller than it was a week ago. I don't care if your analysis is consistent with yout past experience. You've gained new information...when you analysis is consistent with your new information, I will be impressed. |
|
This site best viewed with a jaundiced eye
|
||
"It's the blacks," whispered one white woman in the elevator. "We always worried this would happen."
Is it really news that some white people fear black rioting and see early signs of it pretty much all the time? Maybe we could send OBM down to call her a moron, and politely explain why, but does she really deserve more attention than that?