Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

White People's Burden

By Robert Jensen, AlterNet. Posted August 31, 2005.


It's time for white Americans to fully acknowledge that in the racial arena, they are the problem.
White People's Burden
White People's Burden
Advertisement

Editor's Note: This essay is excerpted from The Heart of Whiteness: Confronting Race, Racism and White Privilege, forthcoming from City Lights, September 2005.

The United States is a white country. By that I don't just mean that the majority of its citizens are white, though they are (for now but not forever). What makes the United States white is not the fact that most Americans are white but the assumption -- especially by people with power -- that American equals white. Those people don't say it outright. It comes out in subtle ways. Or, sometimes, in ways not so subtle.

Here's an example: I'm in line at a store, unavoidably eavesdropping on two white men in front of me, as one tells the other about a construction job he was on. He says: "There was this guy and three Mexicans standing next to the truck." From other things he said, it was clear that "this guy" was Anglo, white, American. It also was clear from the conversation that this man had not spoken to the "three Mexicans" and had no way of knowing whether they were Mexicans or U.S. citizens of Mexican heritage.

It didn't matter. The "guy" was the default setting for American: Anglo, white. The "three Mexicans" were not Anglo, not white, and therefore not American. It wasn't "four guys standing by a truck." It was "a guy and three Mexicans." The race and/or ethnicity of the four men were irrelevant to the story he was telling. But the storyteller had to mark it. It was important that "the guy" not be confused with "the three Mexicans."

Here's another example, from the Rose Garden. At a 2004 news conference outside the White House, President George W. Bush explained that he believed democracy would come to Iraq over time:

"There's a lot of people in the world who don't believe that people whose skin color may not be the same as ours can be free and self-govern. I reject that. I reject that strongly. I believe that people who practice the Muslim faith can self-govern. I believe that people whose skins aren't necessarily -- are a different color than white can self-govern."

It appears the president intended the phrase "people whose skin color may not be the same as ours" to mean people who are not from the United States. That skin color he refers to that is "ours," he makes it clear, is white. Those people not from the United States are "a different color than white." So, white is the skin color of the United States. That means those whose skin is not white but are citizens of the United States are ...? What are they? Are they members in good standing in the nation, even if "their skin color may not be the same as ours"?

This is not simply making fun of a president who sometimes mangles the English language. This time he didn't misspeak, and there's nothing funny about it. He did seem to get confused when he moved from talking about skin color to religion (does he think there are no white Muslims?), but it seems clear that he intended to say that brown people -- Iraqis, Arabs, Muslims, people from the Middle East, whatever the category in his mind -- can govern themselves, even though they don't look like us. And "us" is clearly white. In making this magnanimous proclamation of faith in the capacities of people in other parts of the world, in proclaiming his belief in their ability to govern themselves, he made one thing clear: The United States is white. Or, more specifically, being a real "American" is being white. So, what do we do with citizens of the United States who aren't white?

That's the question for which this country has never quite found an answer: What do white "Americans" do with those who share the country but aren't white? What do we do with peoples we once tried to exterminate? People we once enslaved? People we imported for labor and used like animals to build railroads? People we still systematically exploit as low-wage labor? All those people -- indigenous, African, Asian, Latino -- can obtain the legal rights of citizenship. That's a significant political achievement in some respects, and that popular movements that forced the powerful to give people those rights give us the most inspiring stories in U.S. history.


Digg!

Robert Jensen is a professor of journalism at the University of Texas at Austin.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
I am an American first
Posted by: Just Some Dude on Aug 31, 2005 1:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Always have been and always will be an American. I just so happen to be white too. I resent the fact that the author labels me as being white before being an American. It's attitudes like this that are keeping racism alive and well.

Who cares what color you are? I am sick and tired of having to watch what I say around people like this. My wife is a Chinese American and I call her "Yellow Chick" and she calls me "White Boy", the bleeding left friends I have cringe when they hear us refer to each other like this. It's not a slam against either one of us. Who cares.

Over hearing someone say that there was a guy and three Mexicans just adds, for lack of a better word, color to the story. Does the author suggest that we just pretend that color and cultures do not exist in our country? Does he suggest that we quit refering to people of other cultures as being from other cultures?

Don't get me wrong, I'm a leftie, but some of this P.C. crap is going a bit too far.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: the casual and ironic use of a name Posted by: Just Some Dude
» RE: sticks and stones Posted by: Unbowed
» Why is yellow a slur? Posted by: Olympiada
» RE: often used as a put down Posted by: Unbowed
» Come to an understanding? Posted by: Olympiada
» RE: sticks and stones Posted by: tripllll
» ways of looking at things Posted by: Unbowed
» Lenny Bruce Posted by: Olympiada
» Nasty Posted by: Olympiada
» RE: Nasty Posted by: Unbowed
» One can not live in fear Posted by: Olympiada
» RE: Nasty Posted by: Unbowed
» RE: Lenny Bruce Posted by: mochajava13
» Interest Posted by: Olympiada
» Please accept my apology Posted by: Olympiada
» RE: I am an American first Posted by: kbroshears
» RE: I am an American first Posted by: jeffrey7
» RE: I am an American first Posted by: kittykat
» RE: I am an American first Posted by: mochajava13
» RE: I am an American first Posted by: eaprez
» RE: I am an American first Posted by: DivabyLaw
» RE: I am an American first Posted by: wili59
Hate is the problem. Prejudice is the problem.
Posted by: Samantha Vimes on Aug 31, 2005 1:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whites who fight racial injustice in the workplace, the courtroom, every where they encounter it are not the problem. Whites who inherited no money and no status are not the problem-- they've had to struggle for education and respect as well. Blaming a race-- any race-- is counterproductive. Conservatives have railed a long time against the idea we have feel guilty over the sins of our ancestors-- and not always a person's own ancestors, because how is a white whose ancestors immigrated in the 1890s responsible for Amerind deaths or slavery?

The productive solution is to fight what is going on now, such as assumptions of tokenism by the narrowminded, invisibility of minorities in media. Universities should stop the entire 'legacy student' folly which discriminates against anyone, of any race, who didn't have relatives who could afford the schools in question. We *do* need to be aware that racism is still a threat, and we do need a president who doesn't think American=white (I hope Rice kicked his ass). But blaming ALL whites for SOME whites being stupid is... stupid.

Besides, I'm pinkish-biegey-with-blue-undertones, thank you very much. White is not a human color. Sorry, pet peeve there.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Ignorance is the problem. Posted by: serioustrouble
» RE: Ignorance is the problem. Posted by: johnc271
» separatism Posted by: Olympiada
» Who are you unbowed? Posted by: Olympiada
» RE: Who are you unbowed? Posted by: Unbowed
» Blessed are the peacemakers Posted by: Olympiada
» RE: Ignorance is the problem. Posted by: KikiClaire
» blacks sold blacks into slavery Posted by: Olympiada
» Get lost in all of it a bit? Posted by: Olympiada
» A good start. Posted by: retsam
» RE: A good start. Posted by: retsam
» Creativity is the answer Posted by: Olympiada
» RE: A good start. Posted by: retsam
» We democrats? Posted by: Olympiada
» RE: We democrats? Posted by: retsam
» the attraction Posted by: Olympiada
» RE: Ignorance is the problem. Posted by: mochajava13
» Thank Nakis Posted by: Olympiada
» white man Posted by: Olympiada
I not only disagree, but I think you are the problem!
Posted by: flatulence11 on Aug 31, 2005 2:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Its people like you, Robert, who are keeping the fires of racism burning today.
America has come a long way. I refuse to admit that blacks or whites are a problem. I do however, think that politically corect, pulitzer seeking , authors are a BIG problem!
You dont represent the majority of Americans, and your generalizing statements are ignorant at best.
Good day

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Nail, hammer, hit on head Posted by: agarillo
» RE: don't be so reactionary Posted by: agarillo
» Really? Posted by: retsam
» authors Posted by: Olympiada
What it means to me
Posted by: mmnichols on Aug 31, 2005 2:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In reading the article I see that it is an invitation to look at the issue. We cannot deal with a problem until we admit it exists. This is an opportunity to discuss what we think. In reading the responses it appears to me that the authors would prefer to not look at it. I can understand that. Any time I hear something, or read, something that makes me feel uncomfortable my first response is to want the other person to stop talking or writing. I work at reading or listening so that I can grow as a person. The more I do not want to hear, or read it, the more I need to. The only way any laws changed to ensure the rights of black people in this country was that those in charge, white men, worked at understanding their own prejudices and wrote laws, i.e. the 14th admendment, that granted full citizenship to blacks. To be unwilling to look at the situation, from the another perspective, does nothing to help us grow. I thank the author of the article for bringing this to my attention. I am sometimes amazed at how easy it is to forget that others have different opinions and that those opinions are as valid as mine.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What it means to me Posted by: professordek
» RE: What it means to me Posted by: DivabyLaw
Define the crime.
Posted by: Colin on Aug 31, 2005 3:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think this is an interesting article that highlights an important issue. Personally, I agree with (most) of the authors sentiments. However, there are certain avenues that need to be explored. I will do that the only way I know how.

If I take myself, I can walk down the road past, say, five white people, and the first thing I’ll notice might be if they're pretty (if they’re girls) or maybe what they’re wearing (again, if they’re girls), but if I walk past someone with a different ancestry, the first thing I notice is that they have a different ancestry, regardless of what they are wearing or how attractive they are – that comes second.

Let me clarify here – I attach no morality or personal sentiment to my observations. The fact that I notice this does not mean that I make value judgements about whomever I’m looking at. But I cannot deny that this process takes place.

This leaves me in a predicament. Liberalism tells me that I’m not only to treat everyone as equally, but that I should perceive everyone as being the same. I cannot reconcile these two contradictions. My innate self – my nature – works in opposition to the way the liberal world wants it too. If this is the case for me, I’m betting it’s true of you too.

The issue deals with my main hang up with liberalism. It’s ideology is based on what humans have the potential to be without taking into account what they actually are. Unfortunately, if you're expecting people to start being anything other than people just because there is a better way, you'll end up disappointed. Indeed, so insecure will people feel that they can’t be the person they ‘should’ be, that they will go too far the other way, a little like my contemporaries above.

Personally, I don’t see a crime in George Bush noticing the difference between white people and everyone else, deliberately or accidentally. In fact, I’d go further as to say that I don’t believe, by definition, there can be a crime until someone acts based on such a distinction.

So, to the author of the article I would suggest that there is no real way to eliminate the problem outright, the only solution is to accept, and work on it, until it is no problem. Personally, my ideal world would be one where everyone is so comfortable with who they are that it wouldn’t matter what everyone else thought.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Define the crime. Posted by: jeanie
» :) Posted by: Olympiada
» Strong wit Posted by: Olympiada
Lenny Bruce
Posted by: Tom Degan on Aug 31, 2005 3:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lenny Bruce put it well:
"How many negroes are there in America? I assume at least some census takers have been remiss in their duties and not reporting the full numbers, 'I'm not going into those shithouses, are you kidding me? Hey sonny, how many of you people live in this neighborhood? What? OK, I'll write that down, fourteen'.

"Then sooner or later you're gonna find an all black jury and an all black judge, "THEY'RE ALL BLACK! HOW THE HELL AM I GONNA GET A FAIR SHAKE WITH AND ALL BLACK JURRY??? You're not. Ha! Ha! Ha!"

Good old Lenny! He spoke to us then; He speaks to us still.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY

"'

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Good Old Lenny Posted by: decembrist
» RE: Lenny Bruce Posted by: Unbowed
I will not be ashamed of my heritage
Posted by: John_Clinton on Aug 31, 2005 3:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Okay, so this article was a bit sketch. It did bring up a few good points, but it also left out a lot of important things. For example:

"People we imported for labor and used like animals to build railroads? People we still systematically exploit as low-wage labor?"

Yes, what do we do with the Irish? While I understand that it was easier for the Irish to integrate into society eventually, the country used to hate the Irish, and Catholics, just as much as they hated Asians, or Africans, or whoever else. Every group of immigrants has their issues upon first arriving, but the point is to get past it and work for tolerance. I'm not saying it's an Arab's fault that she is being persecuted, I'm just saying that she's not experiencing anything that white immigrants such as the Irish didn't experience.

Another point that the author misses is that much of America grows up in rural areas. Rural areas are far less likely to have racial diversity than urban areas. If I haven't been brought up around, say, black folk it's a natural reaction to see the color first and then everything else, merely because psychologically I'm trained to notice a difference in my surroundings, and a different skin color qualifies.

I also take issue with the last paragraph that tells me I should negate my heritage. I think that's utter bullshit. I can be just as proud of my various European heritages as anyone else can be proud of their heritage. Does that mean I think mine is better than theirs? Of course not. But I'm proud of it nonetheless. I hate this kind of crap that says I need to be ashamed of being white.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» angry defensiveness Posted by: Olympiada
» Right on! Posted by: Olympiada
» hate Posted by: Olympiada
Missed the point
Posted by: jsoulnh on Aug 31, 2005 4:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think you all missed the point (comments above)!
--Johanna from Concord, NH

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't be scared
Posted by: Angie on Aug 31, 2005 4:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I appreciate Colin's courage in honesty and objectively assessing his own actions, thoughts, feelings, etc. I find that is very difficult for people; esp those who like to think of themselves as doing well in the areas of morality, integrity, etc. It is hard to consider that "Hey, I might actually be a functioning part of a system of white privilege".

Yesterday, I asked a white homeowner's association member about whether or not a playground would be built in a new, predominantly black condo subdivision. He complained that there is already a problem with kids congregating in some spot. From my viewpoint, it is normal for kids to socialize and play. I think he still views black people as the problem.

Anyway, race is usually a hot button.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Don't be scared Posted by: Angie
Hawaiian
Posted by: NativeHawaiian on Aug 31, 2005 4:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think author, Bob Jensen did an excellent job of helping us realize that white folks are a major part of the problem. I like that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

white-black
Posted by: johntindale on Aug 31, 2005 5:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am a white commercial hvac mechanic working in the Washinton metropolitan area. I grew up in Prince Georges County where i was an official minority, and i have been carrying the so-called "white man's burden" for 34 years now. I somehow missed the white priveledge bus, so I find it difficult to understand my responsiblity for this problem of yours.

At any rate, I was recently doing service work at a property that is predominately black. The maintenance guy (a black man) and I diagnosed the problem in a resident's apartment, and the maintenance guy and I decide we needed a part.

The maintenance guy told the resident that we needed to get a part, and that we would be "white black" obviously a replacement for the phrase "right back."

No one got angry, no one protested, I didn't even get embarressed (as I often do when someone points out that I am the only while guy around) we just thought it was funny.

As always- it is the "liberal's burden" to lighten up. You don't like the way black people live in your part of America? Come to DC. Come to Prince George's County and see predom. black neighborhoods with security gates and golf courses. Come see the executive box suite at Nationals games full of high-powered, sucessful black leaders and politicians.

Come see me and my black neighbors sitting on the front porch of our suburban townhouses enjoying a laugh, having a beer, and generally getting along.

Come see when one of my Black friends starts to tell me about some "white lady" that cut them off on the highway, before they sometimes awkwardly realize that I am white.

I almost forgot that racism was a problem at one time in America. Thanks for reminding me and ruining my morning.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» white priveledge bus Posted by: Olympiada
» RE: white-black Posted by: nakis
» RE: white-black Posted by: johntindale
» RE: white-black Posted by: KikiClaire
It's intuitive
Posted by: Urstrly on Aug 31, 2005 5:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Suggest you read "Blink," by Malcolm Gladwell in which he shows how deep our cultural preference for white people runs. Gladwell is biracial, and he agrees he has this bias himself. He even gives an online address where you can (or at least could) take a test that confirms this bias. We can't fight it if we don't acknowledge it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's intuitive Posted by: Freepolazzo
» RE: It's intuitive Posted by: mwildfire
I disagree. I think.
Posted by: bgroat on Aug 31, 2005 5:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think most of us, whatever our race, see people of the same race as the generic term "man" or "woman" and then clarify races different than ours with the added adjective. It doesn't mean that we assign a different human rank or status to different races - it's just that we tend to see ourselves as the generic brand, and anyone different as requiring further qualification. The only problem, of course, is when we DO begin assigning value judgments to those differences.

I appreciate the author's willingness to consider himself part of the problem, but this is one of the gripes against "liberals" (and I certainly am one) that I can sometimes agree with - we sometimes equate self-blame with objectivity, when in fact we may simply be launching a preemptive attack of self-incrimination, maybe because we like the feel of martyrdom. All this by way of saying that no race is the problem - ignorance and fear is and will always be the problem in these areas, and those things know no color lines.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I disagree. I think. Posted by: Iana_gheddis
» martyrdom Posted by: Olympiada
» RE: martyrdom Posted by: bgroat
» Pragmatic Posted by: Olympiada
» RE: Pragmatic Posted by: bgroat
» our reason Posted by: Olympiada
» RE: I disagree. I think. Posted by: kittynboi
Something to think about
Posted by: Erin on Aug 31, 2005 5:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think the author has done a good job here and this ariticle should at least get people thinking. I have been saying for years that racism, racial profiling, etc. are not dead in America yet. I hear the very types of conversations almost daily, where people recounting a situtaion always refer to the race of someone. Why does that happen? Exactly for the reasons the author states. I happen to be white, but I refer to people as that guy or that woman, not that Mexican guy or that Black woman. Why on earth do we have to designate color or race? Why does it matter?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Since when is there even such a thing as "white"?
Posted by: Jasonix on Aug 31, 2005 5:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why does this author think that everyone who shares a certain skin color is the same? My family is from old New England stock - we came to this country seeking religious and political freedom and fought an authoritarian, theocratic state to attain it. My wife is Portuguese - her family came here to get good jobs and money, and they still seem a bit too comfortable with Catholic state religion (they arguably consider earlier Protestant Americans with their hopes of religious freedom to be fundamentally mistaken and hold to a more collectivistic, even fascist world view). These attitudes still mark decisive differences in world view despite the several generations that have passed. There is no "white." There is English, Polish, German, Irish, Italian, Spanish, Swedish, etc. - and in America, they meld. There are more people dating and marrying people of other so-called "races" than ever before, so the goal is for Americans to meld together and "race" to disappear as a meaningful concept. Identity-politic rants like this article do nothing but reinforce artifical distinctions between people, and encourage "people of color" to value these false, pernicious notions of "identity" based on skin color and ancestral history rather than seeing their common humanity with others.

Now let's get back to talking about health care, the war, the environment, and stuff that really matters!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Peace out? Posted by: Gatsby
White People are Not the Problem
Posted by: Jimbarnett on Aug 31, 2005 5:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sophistry is alluring by definition. That does mean that the Jensen's argument is true. His argument is actually false becasue of the false premise(s) upon which it is built. Simply put white people are not the problem. An inarticulate man would on the other hand lacking the appropriate tools of language would fall back on Fuck You Idiot. Get a life and become productive. You are part of the problem and you are no part of the solution. On the other hand I say Have a nice day. p.s whate are you a Bush/Rove closet queen?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Here's what we do...
Posted by: Iana_gheddis on Aug 31, 2005 5:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
how about we teach white people to hate themselves, then we reinforce it by making us write articles about how bad we are. Meanwhile, we encourage "other than whites" to qualify their place in America with terms like, African-American, or Hispanic-American, and make white people call them that. That way, no one is simply an American.
Then, we make minorities into political footballs and come up with new ways to play them every election cycle. There is nothing more fun than watching two white guys running for the same office come up with better ways to accuse each other of not being sensitive enough about minorities. someone somewhere wants everyone to be miserable.
A brilliant idea brought to us by none other than white people who really care. (How come the only time I see people as racial beings is when there is a liberal around pointing it out???).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Here's what we do... Posted by: demidesigrrl
» RE: Here's what we do... Posted by: Jersey Devil
» RE: Here's what we do... Posted by: Sanyk
The next generations
Posted by: DIXBARN on Aug 31, 2005 5:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I read an analysis of the way major scientific theories gain acceptance - the big changes need a change of generation. In other words, the old school proponents die, and the new school scientists then come to power and influence and the theories become mainstream instead of upstart.

I believe changes in social norms change the same way. I grew up in a racist society, believe that I have kicked those learned prejudices, but still notice skin color. Will that change?

My niece (white) kept speaking of a new friend, Nancy. Her mother asked several times, "Have I met her? What does she look like? . . . " My niece's description was about height, cuteness, ... everything except skin color. Turns out Nancy is black. I am astonished but heartened that skin color is such a non-issue for her.

Our discussions of these issues are good for US - we need to continue to educate ourselves about what prejudice we have not yet dislodged in ourselves. I think, though, if we can keep from training our kids to believe as we have, their view of the world will be more fair, less racist. While I wish all these changes could be instantaneous, some will need the time of changes of generation(s).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The next generations Posted by: pinklotus432
Article Misses Larger Issue
Posted by: L. J. Allen on Aug 31, 2005 6:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let me state for full disclosure. I am the following: Black, female, over 40, under 50, middle class with middle class background, born and raised in the southern US, have graduate degree among an extended family where over 60 percent of adults have graduate degrees, homeowner without a mortgage. Whew!!

There are folks who want discussions about racial issues and racism to go away. Then there are those folks who want the discussions to deepen. BOTH GROUPS GET IT WRONG. The problem with Jensen's article is not his lack of sincerity or his accurate observations. The problem is the assumption that if people of basic European ancestry --who are now called "White" or "Caucasian"--would pay attention to their language and the way they perceive people(s) of color, that the world would be a much better place. Blacks, Indians, Chinese, Mexicans, etc. would feel so much better.

Nothing could be further from the truth. "Equal" does not mean "identical." And "unity" should never mean "uniformity." While it is perfectly heinous to treat someone of another race or ethnicity as subhuman, it is perfectly natural to identify people who are perceptibly different from yourself.

Peoples of color, particularly those persons who are economically disadvantaged, really don't care if someone notices "what" they are. What they worry most about is whether that perception will be followed by actions that hurt their chances of success. Mr. Jensen makes some valid points about white privilege and some piquant observations about language. Yet a large majority of people of color really do not care about this kind of analysis because it is not what anyone calls us, but what we answer to that matters.
Peace,

L. J. Allen

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» full disclosure Posted by: Olympiada
» RE: Article Misses Larger Issue Posted by: kittynboi
Sorry, Iana_gheddis, but white folks already hate themselves
Posted by: sausage on Aug 31, 2005 6:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sorry, Iana_gheddis, and all you others whether you consider yourself "liberal" or "conservative", but whites folks already hate themselves.

Tim Wise writes in his book, "White Like Me: Reflections on Race From a Privileged Son", that, following his lectures on racism and white privilege, he asks individuals in the audience to describe what they like best about their race. About what make them proud or feel lucky to be white, black or Latino.

He writes-- I'm doing this from memory as I returned the book to my local library last week, so bear with me--that African Americans and Hispanics invariably come up with lists that include skin color, musical haritage, food etc. Whites, he continues, mostly have negative responses such as, "don't get suspicious looks in the grocery store," and so forth. In other words white Americans don't have much to be proud of just because of their skin color. White Americans, ever those among us who consider themselves color-blind or anti-racist, have all benefited from "white privilege."

Like I said above I'm doing this from memory so I suggest all of you who are posting here on Alternet.org read the book.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» funny guy sausage is Posted by: Olympiada
Bigot or racist? It's all the same old .....
Posted by: lc on Aug 31, 2005 6:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I’m 60 now. My father was not so much a racist as a typical person who finds it easier to blame someone else than to accept reality and rise above it all. I used to think he was a racist until he retired from Ohio and moved to Lake Havasu City, Arizona. In one of our first phone conversations he surprised me when he went off on the Indians across the river from Lake Havasu City. The Indians owned everything. They had all that land across the river and all the poor white retirees only had the little bit of land on their side of the river seemed to be the rant. I was surprised because he had never even mentioned Indians before when he used to go off on Black, Brown and Yellow people. Now Red was added to his bigot list. His racism was more bigotry than race. You can see it everywhere today as hippies, liberals, etc are dredged up for constant ridicule, derogatory remarks and blame.

I have yet to meet a conservative who has ever done anything wrong. Everything is blamed on someone or something else. Conservatives have basically blamed the downfall of civilization on liberals. Conservatives are mostly white people like my father who worked hard and didn’t spend enough time finding out what was really going on choosing instead to slip into simple racial epitaphs in support of their blame game.

Sincerely,
Ron Linker