Posted on 11/15/2012 5:12:47 PM PST by Altura Ct.
Once again, an article about racism wasn’t well received by the McGill community. What a surprise…
Particularly, I’m talking about some of the comments made in regard to the piece, “You are racist” (Guillermo Martínez de Velasco, October 18, Commentary, page 7), in reference to the author’s definition of racism: “…assuming anything about anyone based on a perceived deviation from a racial norm known as white.”
Some of the comments took issue with situating racism within whiteness. Replies questioned examples of intra-racism: racist acts amongst and within racially, ethnically, or nationally homogenous or similar spaces, and historical racism against fellow white bodies (re: persons of Irish, Italian, and Jewish decent). They also questioned the author’s lack of statistical evidence (of racism).
I want to focus on these three arguments to directly show that this article’s definition of racism was just too perfectly stellar for words.
Before I begin, however, I want to address the reoccurring “racism is a social construct” notation made by many. Ain’t it great? Some few individuals have taken one or two sociology courses and have determined that race is a social construct. Let me give you a round of applause….
Race, however, is more than just a social construct; it is also an identity. It is one that people not only subscribe to but see as a way of self-identifying. Emphasizing that race is a social construct, in the ways that many of the commenters did, is exemplary of the exact type of racism the author describes. Identifying and emphasizing the social construction of race, as a white person, is an example of your white privilege. You see race as ‘firstly’ a social construct because you are white and don’t have to think about race and the implications of race in your everyday life in the same way, and to the same immediacy, as racialized people. Race, whether a construct or not, is manifested in one’s cultural practice, embodied experience, identity, and life. Wanting the author to stress the socially constructed nature of race invalidates the intricacies and impacts of race in the lives of us, racialized (and racially politicized) bodies, and validates your lack thereof.
Now let’s get back to it.
First, intra-racial racism: “What about racialized bodies that enact racism against one another? They aren’t white, so how is that racism (under that definition)”* is usually how the rebuttal followed.
Whiteness, as the author clearly explains, is the norm. It is how society functions, exists, sees, and defines itself. And by society, I am indeed making reference to transnational societies that have, in any way, come in contact with whiteness and white societies, be it through colonialism, imperialism, genocide, globalization, developmental aid, technology, et cetera.
To better understand this, let’s use an example of intra-racial racism: say, shadeism. The modern forms of shadeism – intra-racial/ethnic discrimination based on a person’s shade tone, most often dis-privileging darker skinned people – are found in cultures, nations and racial groups globally. These include black, South Asian, East Asian, Latin American (and even, believe it or not, white) communities. And although this is intra-racial and occurs within homogeneously racial and ethnic groupings, it is still in line with the definition presented by Martínez de Velasco. It is because whiteness is the norm that shadeism (or intra-racial racism) exists and occurs. Light and lighter skinned people within the North American context are most explicitly valorized, given aesthetic privilege, and possess great amounts of social capital in their ability to navigate spaces much easier than those of darker complexion because they are aesthetically closer to white. Simply, whiteness, even in examples of intra-racial racism, is still the traceable root of the racism because, as the norm, it superiorizes those who are closer to ‘white(ness)’ and inferiorizes those who aren’t. Please remember this as we move to the second point.
Second, anti-white racism: “Racism happens to white people. What about that?”*
Indeed, what we know to be racism has happened to particular white bodies throughout history: for example, to people of Irish, Italian, and Jewish descent. But let me begin by saying, white people, in case you forgot, are racialized too. You have and will always be racialized. But it is whiteness’ ability to exempt itself from racialization that makes it so crafty in its ability to normalize and inflict racism upon the Other.
Anti-white racism still happens because of whiteness. And while anti-white racism has been predicated on so many factors, understanding that the act of racialization and racializing white peoples – such as Jewish people – was a central element of anti-white racism is key to understanding my point: white groups were racialized and declared Other.
Let’s take Italian-Canadians/Americans for starters. The historical criminalization and problematic conflation of this group to criminal, ‘mafia’-related activity is one example of this racialization. These stereotypes have had a longstanding history within visibly racialized groups, especially within the North American context. Criminalization acts as a tool for hyper-visiblizing specific marginalized bodies/groups. Black, Latino, Filipino, and brown bodies are examples of how groups/bodies have been coded as criminals for centuries and subsequently targetted (e.g. racially profiled, demonized, et cetera). To put it simply, the criminalization of peoples is an example of how racialization and racism happen.
Irish racialization occurred in a different form: moral-elitist demonization, if I can coin such a term. Several writers on anti-Irish racism detail how the British demonized the Irish, characterizing them as dirty, drunk, lazy, and violent while defining themselves as civilized, morally pure, and industrious. Now, doesn’t this remind you of something? Perhaps colonialism and the same racist colonialist tactic used by the British to racially differentiate and hierarchize themselves as superior to the people of Africa, the West Indies, Latin Americas, et cetera? I think so.
Jews were also racialized and, as such, experienced racism. While some Jewish people experience enormous amounts of white privilege as many of them are white (let’s not get that twisted), anti-Semitic racism existed on account of their racialization. Jews, during the Holocaust, were allegedly said to be racially distinguishable from ‘pure’ whites. Racist distinctions based on physiognomic features that characterized them as different from the desired Aryan race parallels colonialism(s) transnationally and is an example of racialization at its most basic level. Recall the colonial practices of racist, white, anthropological pseudo-science that sought to highlight the physical differences between the black African and white European populaces in hopes of strengthening their claims to racial superiority. Same tactics as those used against the Jews, no?
In all three examples, whiteness takes different forms, but always remains the central point (or norm) from which racism occurs. Whites, who are not criminals, dirty, lazy, or drunk and whose physiognomic features are ever-so flawless, become the picture of (racist) perfection. The Irish, Italians, and Jews, on the other hand, are constructed as the antithesis and, poof – there you have it, my friends, racism.
Third, statistical evidence: “Can you please provide statistical evidence for your experiences of racism?”*
How better to answer than with a whole lot of ‘fuck no’s’ and a side of, ‘sit yo ass down!’
This urge white folks have to demand statistical proof of racialized people’s experiences of racism is laughable at best. Racism is multifunctional and multidimensional. It is systemic, institutionalized, embodied, subtle, experiential, overt, everyday, infrequent, and so much more. So to ask me for proof of racism is, number one, racist, and two, ain’t never gonna happen, like ever. So please, I beg of you, stop asking for such absurdity.
*All quoted comments are paraphrases of actual comments directed to the article, “You are racist.”
“I feel like I am living in some Lewis Carroll laudanum nightmare where reality has been inverted over race
and so damn quick
I had hoped we had a couple more election cycles”
I hear you.
And the irony is that the Marxist tools’ divisive fixation on imaginary white racism and their resultant voting pattern is helping to destroy the economy, and therefore, the future of our “Great Melting Pot”, and the universal suffering that is ensuing has no respect for skin color. They’re tearing down their own economic house and they don’t even know it because they’re so obsessed with a straw man.
why?
because you feel it or hope it's so?
forget anecdotal evidence, simply how race breaks down politically would force empirical minded folks to look around
our nation has collapsed because we let them in...now you can dress it up race or culture..chicken or egg first argument there..but the end result is painfully obvious
the less white this nation is the more leftist...you may live in the north or out west and not understand this like most of us do..so you get consideration for that
they are killing the one place they all once upon a time wanted to be
for opportunity
i’m not sure we ever melted except when we were fairly similar up till mid 20th century..it's easier to "melt" similar peoples...
but we no doubt were a lighthouse for everyone and did allow a sort of distinct stew
many here refuse to look but balkanized nations do not survive
nowhere is it written in stone it has to stay this way
it's weird how Americans think they are special and unaffected by stupid policy like it will all be ok
well it woulda been had we held to our founders
I am telling you we are now under the yoke of a leftist racial demagogic patron..somehwere between Kingfish and Evan Peron
Peace corps platitudes have no place amongst those who want to defeat this...it's going to take frank talk and nerve and getting mean...like Unforgiven speech by Eastwood..I'm almost convinced it will be violence at some point..don;t know if the earners have it anymore to be honest..they look mighty soft to me
So what’s he going to do if I just laugh derisively at his pseudo-intellectual (ie, BS) screed? Call me a racist?
I’m way done with pandering to this crap. Live up to the standard of behavior or be judged accordingly.
Well, since blacks see whites as racists no matter what whites do, then why should we care what blacks think? I mean, why not re-enslave them since that’s what they think of us anyway? Most blacks are on welfare, meaning I pay for their upkeep, so I might as well get the benefit of their labor as they benefit from mine.
These racists never think about that end result of their racist views about whites.
I say it because secularly, I do not seek to become what I loathe. And Biblically, because it fits my interpretation of what God wants and seeks...of me.
I don't know how anyone couldn't have seen this coming. Simply the birthrates alone...
Africa for Africans, China for Chinese, Arabia for Muslims, Euro-America for everyone.
Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.
You haven’t seen racism until you’ve witnessed black on black “racism”.. New immigrants ready and willing to work hard from Dominican and or Africa paired up with entitlement inner city american born blacks. They cannot stand each other.. because one cans how up on the shores of the country without a penny in their pocket, and wind up successful within a few short years, and the other just whines about a lifetime of being kept down.
Embrace it. That’s what I do. I’m not only not sorry that I’m white, I’m downright proud to be. Why shouldn’t I be? If other races can be proud of their race, so can whites, and I’d say that whites as a race have much of which to be proud.
And if the author of this puerile pos doesn’t like it that her race is responsible for such achievements as Detroit and and the new South Africa, she can just go “sit down and shut up” Her race did it, they can own it. They can also own their crime rate, low academic scores, and the fact that people will take a loss on their home to move when the neighborhood raches a tipping point of her race, because the saying “there goes the neighborhood” exists for a reason (see Detroit, Birmingham, etc).
As usual wardaddy well said. Derbyshire’s “The Talk” holds true, and what he said regarding race was for once, the truth instead of meaningless platitudes.
And the terrorist Mandela is in good company with his Nobel Cracker Jack prize. If it was good enough for Arafat, it’s good enough for Mandela. It’s certainly good enough for Hussein.
Wardaddy I think that conservatives may be the worst about kissing azz and being blackmailed by the race card because we have been so intimidated by the threat of being called that awful thing -”racist”- that we of all people resolutely refuse to open our eyes and not be afraid of the truth. The truth would set us free, and freedom is the very thing we’re losing now in every aspect of life
Exactly. If the ethnic cleansing which is happening to whites in white countries was happening to any other race in their countries, the UN would put its full force behind its own regulations against ethnic cleansing/genocide, but since it’s just whites (the race which has fed the world and made almost every advance in material welfare in history), they ignore it.
“but I got news for ya...it’s all too damned late...too much naivete and weakness and this crazy need to believe in the culture of sameness while every single minority bar none believes the exact opposite”
This is the essence. The “culture of sameness”.
Many conservatives will pounce with words the moment “Multiculturalism” and “Diversity” are mentioned.
But anyone who questions the “all are created equal and can be just like us” paradigm will be castigated by those same “conservatives”.
This remains American conservatism’s “cognitive dissonance”.
“Multiculturalism” and “egalitarianism” are flip sides of the same coin.
You can’t have one without the other.
Yet conservatives cling to this dream the same way a miser squeezes a penny. We keep trying to spend it, but find it has no value in the real world.
The only use for this worn out slug is to pitch it into the fountain of hopeless fantasies, where it belongs...
John Jay, in Federalist Paper #2:
"With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people -- a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence."
What was left of that country was buried under the flood of immigration from the Third World that was the result of the Immigration Act of 1965, with millions of Third World illegals on top of it.
But then Liberals and 'Proposition Nation' Neocons have never believed that America is an historic nation formed by a particular people anyway. For them it is nothing more than an ideology, a shopping mall with a motto and a flag.
And remember to ask them why slavery is okay in Africa to this very day, but not here.
>>And remember to ask them why slavery is okay in Africa to this very day, but not here.
Shhhh. We don’t talk about that. The only slavery in history was in the US.
I worry along with Wardaddy that we may have crossed a point where reversal of degradation may not be possible. That so many on both seaboards and the government-dependent across the rust belt decided the status quo of government reliance was the way to go sickens me. That these people do not note that their "president" goes to great lengths to avoid mentioning God while indulging in mean-spirited divisiveness whenever possible astonishes me. We are witnessing an era where white Americans are expected to actually deny their own history of astounding real progress for a fairy tale of "progressiveness" hatched by a socialist/anarchist named Saul Alinsky who despised the very concept of personal freedom that inspired our founders to fight for independence.
That so many, of all colors and ethnicity, reelected a failure of a man out of wrongfully perceived racial guilt or some other factor that should have had nothing to do with choosing the best person to lead the free world - shame on them all. Racism is NOT the primary factor motivating most people regarded as white. This election proved that beyond doubt. Mitt's hiding his religion was a factor along with his wishy-washiness on all things. Massive fail for not backing Newt or someone better, Republican Party.
Wardaddy is also right that conservatives, who built this site with their time and donations, need to take greater hold over the moderates and barely-disguised liberals who think "reaching across the aisle" means bending over when the Democrat machine in Congress spouts accusations of racism, mean-spiritedness and insensitivity. Even Bill Maher (the notorious liberal atheist) wrote that a spade is a spade and that's that. And he was referring to a shovel. Stick to what is true in our hearts without trying to accommodate what our hearts are telling us is wrong and evil. If you need a primer on racism just look south into Mexico and further. We are and always have been better than that.
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.