This may be somewhat relevant, regardless, these conversations always remind me of this:
"I don’t know what you mean by ‘glory,’ " Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don’t—till I tell you. I meant ‘there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!’ "
“But ‘glory’ doesn’t mean ‘a nice knock-down argument’,” Alice objected.
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”
It’s not a trap, dude. There’s many options you could do to not be defensive. Here are some:
You could read the article and think about it carefully.
Wait, I said “many options,” didn’t I? Sorry, there was only the one.
But after you do that one, you could respond in several ways. You could discuss specifically why you disagree with the article’s thrust (saying the syndrome is “made up” is absurd–all syndromes are “made up”, they’re collections of symptoms that show up in concert and appear to have a single root cause, that’s what a syndrome is–so calling the syndrome “made up” doesn’t constitute specific disagreement). You could discuss specifically why you think “white fragility syndrome” is too specific, or too broad, a description of the behavior in question. You could decide that maybe it does represent something you’ve seen before, and that you’ve learned something from reading about it. You could explain why you’re the sort of Foucaultian philosopher who believes that pathologizing behavior is counterproductive to healthy behavior.
There are a helluva lot of ways you could respond that don’t “fall into a trap” or whatever ridiculous thing you’re imagining is happening. But they all start with the same step, a step you manifestly didn’t take.
I think it’s the other way around – fear of false accusations of racism means that many are afraid to actually call racism what it really is. I oppose false accusations – those are bad. But I’m willing to risk occasionally making a mistake, and occasionally possibly making a false accusation, in order to try to be as accurate as possible in identifying racist behavior. I totally accept that I might sometimes be wrong, and I want to be challenged on it. When I’m wrong I’ll admit it and apologize. But I think a missed opportunity to identify racism is far more damaging to society than a false accusation, which is why if one must err on one side or the other, I think that’s the side to err on.
False accusations start conversations and can be taken back, with everyone edified and educated, hopefully. An instance of racism ignored just allows it to continue, and even allows the perpetrators to feel as though their actions are condoned and accepted by society. I think more conversation is better – even difficult ones – so false accusations by mistake (with the opportunity to correct one’s self and apologize) are preferable, in my mind, to a failure to identify and criticize actual racist behavior. Ideally the false accusations would be entirely avoided, but that’s probably not realistic.
That’s possible, but I see the opposite happen a great deal too.
But that’s you.
Again, that’s you. I wasn’t talking about you.
I think it’s just as important to call out false accusations as to make real ones, because the false ones dilute the real ones.
But that rarely happens. Usually it ends with everyone really mad and the conversation ending. Again, not thinking of an internet board, but the real world.
You seem to think I’m saying that one shouldn’t call out racism because of false accusations. Not what I’m saying. I’m saying some people call out racism long before they have good evidence of it.
I think false accusations often shut down, and more importantly, head off - good conversation.
I think millions of white people want absolutely nothing to do with talking about race because they fear false accusations of racism. I think the language issue a huge part of that - look at how you can now be accused of racism for using “thug” for an example.
I’d say they need to be called out, not just avoided. I think being false called a racist is a serious insult, because racism is wrong, and I also think it hurts the effort to stop racism. It attacks potential allies instead of enemies.
I’m fine with calling out any accusations you think are false. By all means, say “hey I think you’re mistaken about me because of x, y, and z”. That can definitely start a good conversation. But I think it’s very wise to recognize that it’s indeed possible to be a good and decent person and still occasionally say or do something racist – whether out of ignorance of some aspect of language, or out of some unconscious bias, or something else. So if someone says “hey, I think that thing you said/did might be racist”, it may be a false accusation based on nothing; it may be a misunderstanding based on some quirk of language; or it may actually be a legitimate point that you could take to improve yourself (not you in particular, but the “general” you).
You’ll never catch me say “I’m not racist/bigoted”, because I don’t think it’s truly possible for anyone to know for sure. All I can say is “I strive not to be racist/bigoted”, or “I don’t believe I’m a racist/bigoted person”, or “I hope I’m not racist/bigoted”, or something similar. And the striving doesn’t end, in my view – language changes, culture and society change, and new biases can come to light that were almost impossible to see in past decades.
But that’s where it too often gets stuck. People either don’t have the guts to call it out in the first place, or they are so viciously attacked and shouted down that they back off and slink away, and avoid the subject in the future. I’m thinking about public discourse, often involving politicians or members of the media, but it happens in every day interactions too.
Absolutely.
I have a slightly different take on that. I don’t believe “being a racist” is just an impulse, though racist or bigoted thoughts may be. Being a racist is the choice to act on those impulses rather than resist them. It’s a belief. So I’ll say I’m not a racist. I may not always live up to that, but saying “I’m not a racist” is part of saying I strive to not be racist. It’s like saying you are not a Republican, even though you may say stupid things every once in a while.
I think the ones who back off and slink away, in my experience, do so (in many cases, at least) because they inevitably dig their own hole deeper – they might say “but I have a black friend”, or “but I oppose slavery”, or “why aren’t you complaining about black on black crime” or one of the many other ways to demonstrate (at least in my opinion) a lack of understanding of what racism really is in America, and are (metaphorically) pilloried for it.
He didn’t mean it, himself, as niggers, but I’m pretty sure he’s aware of its vogue among the white “law and order” set, for whom it does veer (more or less) that way. He was attempting to score a point with an audience that is sometimes suspicious of him.
Perhaps, though I favor all approaches – the kindler, gentler approach can work to educate some people; while I’ve seen the harshest criticism and even mockery work to shake some people up to reassess their views. Some have no idea that their views and understandings of some things might be bigoted, racist, or otherwise biased, and easily brush off the “gentler” forms of discussion, while being totally blindsided by a harsher criticism to the point that they actually consider that they might be wrong.
I’m sure this happens, but how often does a false accusation that was truly based on nothing go anywhere beyond nutty shouting, or cause any harm? I think it’s quite rare.
Yeah, but you have to be really really sure that your opponent is a virulent racist and yet at the same time completely unaware of it. If it’s just that you don’t understand his views, or that YOU are wrong about racism, not him, then it’s going to backfire, and piss him off.
I think it does plenty of harm. Remember, for every person experiencing it, there may be many others watching on Youtube or reading about it or whatever.
I don’t think they have to be a “virulent racist” – maybe just a stubborn person clinging to some word or flag that they, for some reason, deem important, or similar.
But it might be just as effective for them (or perhaps the other approaches will). It’s increasingly clear that racism in public view is less and less acceptable in American society every year. I think the shaming, harsh criticism, and mockery of racism and racists is a huge part of this, especially on the internet. Some assertions are considered beyond the pale, as they should be, in my view. Other assertions aren’t there yet, but should be, in my view.
No, trying to make sure the bad ol’ racists are always front and center and those annoying “good” white people don’t spoil things by not being racist. Too complicated for you.
