Posted on 08/04/2018 3:47:53 AM PDT by reaganaut1
The best way to grasp how sociology has managed to make color-blind racism (CBR) seem believable is to study its Newspeak (to continue the Orwell theme).
Whiteness
To many modern sociologists, color blindness is a racist weapon that works, somehow, through whiteness, a scheme of thought invisible to most whites, but revealed by CBR sociology. Whiteness is part of systemic racism: “Exposing the Whiteness of Color Blindness” is a chapter subhead in Bonilla-Silva’s book. Whiteness is as real an identity as blackness. None of these, neither whiteness, nor blackness, nor systemic racism is measurable in an objective way. Whiteness, “the practices of the ‘new racism’—the post-civil rights set of arrangements that preserves white supremacy” in the words of Bonilla-Silva—is apparently hegemonic: “I contend that ‘color-blind’ ideology plays an important role in the maintenance of white hegemony,” writes Ashley “Woody” Doane, a leading “whiteness studies” advocate who heads the sociology department at the University of Hartford.
“Whiteness” is employed as a method of maintaining control over other groups by the “dominant culture.” Hence, “challenging white hegemony” is a major motif for “whiteness studies.” According to Bonilla-Silva, only race traitors (an odd term, since they seem to be the only non-racist whites)—“whites who do not dance to the tune of color blindness”—can escape from whiteness. Color blindness is part of the whiteness strategy and is therefore racist.
Whiteness, like racism, is also unconscious. A former student of Bonilla-Silva’s raises the obvious question: “How does one test for the unconscious?” but, like Bacon’s Jesting Pilate, Bonilla-Silva stays not for an answer. Others have tried. There is something called the “implicit-bias” test which pretends to measure unconscious processes. But it has little or no scientific basis, despite the existence of a Harvard University website.
(Excerpt) Read more at jamesgmartin.center ...
Underlying it all, is the Left’s implicit assumption that all white people have a collective duty to all non whites, to create an egalitarian system.
To which I say, screw that.
wow!
The concentration camps that tortured and exterminated millions of Jews, Poles, Gypsies, the crippled, and their political enemies did not spring up over night. They were years in the making, whose foundation was decades hate filled rhetoric and propaganda. The very notion of “White Privilege” is dehumanization and demonizing based on race alone.
The stage is being set for the horrors of the Biblical Tribulation.
Just another biased, rant-lecture about racism, created from whole cloth.
They think the more things they can define as “racist”, the more control they’ll have over “whitey”.
Well, this isn’t South Africa.
While they’re preaching to the choir, we’re stockpiling what we need if it comes to it.
I appreciate them making all their notions public, and we’re taking notes. Surprise is a formidable advantage, and they’re helping to wrap the packages.
There is an extra “in that link. Use this:
www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3676159/posts
Racism is a meaningless word.
Everyone is racist, no one is racist, only whites are racist, no, “democrats are the real racists”, blah, blah, blah.
Arguing over meaningless words is a waste of time.
So, “white” folks carrying the gene rendering them color-blind cannot be “racist”, right?
It is Cloven-Piven's "overload the system" where they keep coming up with ridiculous definitions and rules that don't make sense and contraditionary. That's the point. They want everyone confused.
I, as a white guy, can be walking down the street and a black guy punches me in the head and screams, "I hate you emeffing white people" and I am expected to say the black guy is not a racist. If I say he is a racist, it proves I am a racist.
The question is, "What is the motive of the guy punching me?" Apparently he has the black privilege to assault any white people just because they were born white.
Another thing that confuses me is to hear a black call a white a "racist." That is stupid because by their definition, all whites are born racist so why even say it. White people should say, "I was born that way and there's nothing I can do about it, so it's not my fault and you can't hold it against me."
Of course, if someone is born with paralyzed legs and has to be in a wheelchair we can't blame them, keep pointing it out, make fun of them, or, the ultimate, punch him in the head or even kill him. That would be very rude. So, why are black people OK with doing that same thing to white people?
Rhetorical question. The answer is obvious. The fact that the leftists have set it up that it doesn't make sense and they don't want a solution.
The idea is to create chaos. All of this pseudo-intellectual babbling is adding layer and layer of confustion.
See my post #10. I meant to send it to all.
Good post, but it is important to stop quibbling over the word “racist”.
It was invented by Leon Trotsky in the 1930s, it has no fixed meaning, and discussing it (much less using it as a weapon) can get you nowhere.
For later
Leftist thugs need racism so they can blame it on freedom and destroy the freedom.
The #1 goal of many blacks and their allies of other races is to preserve and enhance their victim status. This and all the blather of “whiteness studies” is just the latest effort.
The #1 goal of many blacks and their allies of other races is to preserve and enhance their victim status. This and all the blather of “whiteness studies” is just the latest effort.
So they make things up that cannot be measured or proven.
Their attempts to 'learn' about us or 'study' us is false research. They can never understand what it is to be white since they were not born white and they certainly are not qualified to be teaching about it. That is serious cultural appropriation.
They will try to argue that whites are not a minority but, as they say, we are all citizens of the world, and we certainly are a minority.
“They will try to argue that whites are not a minority but, as they say, we are all citizens of the world, and we certainly are a minority.”
You apparently are burdened by the belief that the word minority has a specific definition, actually it means whatever the left wishes it to mean at any given moment, as do all words. I once pointed out to a young woman who kept referring to women as a “minority” that women were the ONLY majority I could name since there are definitely more women than men. She responded by explaining that minority does not actually mean minority it means whatever suits her side of the argument. I’m NOT exaggerating.
No, I am doing what they do by using my own definition to suit my argument at the moment. I reserve the right to use a different definition in the future.
Some people identify themselves and others by race. Some by religion. Some by family tradition and heritage. Some by family business. Some by their own work and achievment. Some by where they fit in achievements and stronger personalities of others.
Color Blindness means that one identifies self and others by attribute (or combination of attributes) other than race.
Hypothetical scenarios.
The house next door to my parents had a for sale sign ... and then a sold sign appeared. What would my parents wonder about their new neighbors whom they do not know?
Are they born again Christians? That would be the first thing that pops into their heads.
If they are born again, what church do they go to?
If they are not born again, how should we witness to them?
A Democrat patronage in Chicago, when faced with the same situation, immediately thinks:
I wonder what race the new buyer is? I hope they are not a different race from me because that will put me in a difficult spot when trying to get the votes of my neighbors. And if I don’t get the votes, I’ll lose my job.
From a sociological perspective, there is little difference between my parents witnessing for Christ and Democrat patronage witnessing for the Democrat party.
Here in Atlanta there is rivalry between the Dawgs and other SEC teams as graduates from other SEC schools live in Atlanta for the jobs here. When a house is sold, the first thing that pops into the heads of many of my neigbhors is: I wonder which SEC team they support?
The assumption is that all identity is by SEC team.
The reality is that most of these new immigrants to Atlanta are from the Rust Belt. But the heads of my neigbhors are only in the SEC.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.