This chapter is really problematics, in particular, and it starts off on the wrong foot with a factually inaccurate assertion grounded in the absurdity of wokeness.
"Many of us have been taught to believe that there are distinct biological and genetic differences between races."
"The idea of race as a biological construct makes it easy to believe that many of the divisions we see in society are natural. But race, like gender, is socially constructed."
Race is no more of a social construct than gender is. There are biological differences between the races, that is just a scientific, anthropological, genetic, psychological, and physiological fact. The same as there are differences between genders, male and female, the only two genders on the planet. But I digress, the discussion on gender is for another blog, not this one.
The following are biological differences between the races:
I can go on and on with factually accurate scientific data further debunking DiAngelo's fallacious assertion that race is socially constructed. It is not. It is rooted in scientific fact. As such, it is one of many concrete arguments that debunk the infamous Critical Race Theory (CRT).
This next part of this chapter is so absurd it is laughable.
"... the US economy was based on the abduction and enslavement of African people, the displacement and genocide of Indigenous people, and the annexation of Mexican lands."
The US economy was NOT based on the abduction and enslavement of African people, period. Slavery actually hurt the US economy.
The US economy was NOT based on the displacement and genocide of Indigenous people. They were just collateral damage in the name of human progress. Yes, that is a crass thing to say, but when you get down to the nuts and bolts of it, that is what happened.
The US economy was NOT based on the annexation of Mexican lands. All three of these failed assertions just do not substantiate the underlining claim. The US economy was built upon the industrial revolution. Entreprenurial ventures. Inventions. Progess. Real estate purchases. So on and so forth.
As a so-called sociologist, DiAngelo put forth this absurd claim that racial inferiority was "created" in order to "justify unequal treatment" and likewise triggered it. This is so patently absurd on its face that it is just counterintuitive to reality.
All human experience is rooted in observation. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to observe that an Asian child excels in school whereas an African student does not. That a white student excels whereas an African student does not. There is enough data that has been collected over the decades that firmly establish that blacks simply lag behind all other races. That is just a scientific fact. Racism has nothing to do with it.
As I read on, I could not help but feel dumbfounded by the sheer ignorance of DiAngelo's juxtaposed concepts of racism, discrimination, and prejudice, all of her definitions were simply prima facie fallacious. Pure fiction, on her part.
"Prejudice is pre-judgment about another person based on the social groups to which that person belongs."
"Prejudice is foundational to understanding white fragility because suggesting that white people have racial prejudice is perceived as saying that we are bad and should be ashamed"
"Most of us acknowledge that we feel some unease around certain groups of people, if only a heightened sense of self-consciousness."
The following is a famous quote affirming a position held by the Reverend Jesse Jackson. "There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps... then turn around and see somebody white and feel relieved." Even Jackson knew that whites were far less harmful than black Americans, his own race. He knew too that intraracial violence was more of a problem for the black community than was any measure of white racism.
Notwithstanding, DiAngelo once again gets the definitions of key terms in this debate/discussion all wrong.
"To understand racism, we need to first distinguish it from mere prejudice and discrimination."
No, we do not. Each term is inherently different at its core. Racism is a false belief that one race is superior to another with no basis in fact. Prejudice is just simply misconceived notions or unreasonable preconceived judgments for one thing over another. Discrimination is merely a distinction between unlike things. Things that one prefers over another due to inate desires. That's it.
DiAngelo goes on to claim that "Discrimination is action based on prejudice. These actions include ignoring, exclusion, threats, ridicule, slander, and violence." Wrong. Discrimination is based in personal and vicarious experiences, not prejudice. One cannot be prejudiced if they know not that which has the potential to be a danger to them. Knowledge makes us aware of our surroundings beyond immediate perceptions.
I could not help myself but laugh when DiAngelo wrote the following: "Most of us cannot acknowledge that we do feel some unease around certain groups of people, if only a heightened seance of self-consciousness" Read her statement again and consider what Reverend Jesse Jackson declared he felt relieved when he turned around in a dark alley to realize it was white people. versus blacks.
"Discrimination is action based on prejudice. These actions include ignoring, exclusion, threats, ridicule, slander, and violence."
No, discrimination is not action based on prejudice. Discrimination is the cognizant ability to make informed distinctions or informed judgments. What DiAngelo should have said was Stereotyping is an action based on prejudice, as both require an uninformed, irrational reaction to a thing, something, or someone.
"Most of us can acknowledge that we do feel some unease around certain groups of people, if only a heightened sense of self-consciousness."
The following is a famous quote from Reverend Jesse Jackson:
Anyone and everyone can acknowledge that they feel some unease around certain, or even from members of their own group of people.
His fear is substantiated by decades of criminological data that firmly establish a certain segment of the black male community are incredibly violent, as Jesse Jackson well knows.
"Everyone has prejudice, and everyone discriminates."
That goes without saying, DiAngelo. Whites, blacks, browns, yellow, red... everyone discriminates but not without actual justification. A justification that even Jesse Jackson knows all too well.
"Racism is a system."
That statement is patently absurd on its face and counterintuitive to common sense. Let us look at the definition of racism and system, respectively.
Racism - noun
a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.
System - noun
an assemblage or combination of things or parts forming a complex or unitary whole:a mountain system; a railroad system. any assemblage or set of correlated members:a system of currency; a system of shorthand characters. an ordered and comprehensive assemblage of facts, principles, doctrines, or the like in a particular field of knowledge or thought:a system of philosophy. a coordinated body of methods or a scheme or plan of procedure; organizational scheme:a system of government. any formulated, regular, or special method or plan of procedure:a system of marking, numbering, or measuring; a winning system at bridge. due method or orderly manner of arrangement or procedure:There is no system in his work.
Racism and System are mutually exclusive terms. Racism is purely an unfounded belief in superiority. A system is more ordered, informed, specific and with purpose. There is no purpose to racism. There is purpose to an efficient system. Racism does not make or equate to that of an actual system, by definition and/or purpose.
The following passages from this chapter are patently absurd and draw absolutely false conclusions.
"The system of racism begins with ideology, which refers to the big ideas that are reinforced throughout society."
"These ideas are also reinforced through social penalties when someone questions an ideology and through the limited availability of alternative ideas."
"Examples of ideology in the United States include individualism, the superiority of capitalism as an economic system and democracy as a political system, consumerism as a desirable lifestyle, and meritocracy (anyone can succeed if he or she works hard)."
The glowing irony here is dumbfounding. The United States is the greatest social, cultural and self-governing experiment the world over. It is the pinnacle of the world where anyone and everyone wants to come here because of this country's successes and aforementioned ideologies. America is a success because of those ideologies. And yet DiAngelo decries we failed and because of America's greatness via those ideologies, that racism is still as bad as it was since the first African slave landed on the shores of the Eastern coast. What a joke.
DiAngelo then goes off the rails with this crazy statement...
"People of color [may] also hold prejudices and discriminate against white people, but they lack the social and institutional power that transforms their prejudice and discrimination into racism; the impact of their prejudice on whites is temporary and contextual."
Temporary? Contextual?
How temporary or contextual is this:
I could go on and on and on with one example after another of the bullshit trumped up fallacious allegations against any non-person of color (specifically blacks) that have been weaponized to destroy numerous innocent people's livelihoods and their family altogether.
The factual inaccuracies and historical errors in this following statement are just bizarre:
"Whites hold the social and institutional positions in society to infuse their racial prejudice into laws, policies, practices, and norms of society in a way that people of color do not."
What a bunch of malarky. Blacks have been involved in social and institutional positions since the 1800s.
Joseph Hayne Rainey - first black male Congressman, a republican, no less. There have been numerous people of color in the United States Congress, and yet the progressive left would have you believe otherwise. Mary Ellen Pleasant became one of the first black female millionaires, next to Madame C.J. Walker. Then there is Macon B. Allen, Lawyer and Teacher, one of the first black lawyers in this country.
I could go on and on with a factually accurate historical recounting of all the people of color who made a very specific and direct impact in this country serving to categorically debunk DiAngelo's fallacious claims. But why bother, right? The leftists will just scoff at factually accurate historical truths. Those who hate the truth do so cause to them, truth sounds like hate. Therefore, they hate the truth.
The rationale DiAngelo gives in this following statement is utterly dumbfounding.
"People of color may also hold prejudices and discriminate against their own and their groups of color, but this bias ultimately holds them down and, in this way, reinforces the system of racism that still benefits whites."
So, in other words, DiAngelo, a white woman, is ascribing the label of coon, Uncle Tom, sell out and the like to any person of color who rightly, intelligently, and factually calls out their own for the criminality and anti-social behavior that they exhibit and instill in their fatherless children, generation after generation. It is, factually, what leftist progressive white guilt liberals want. They are the true racists, not conservatives. Not honest innocent people of all colors trying to live their lives. Simply put, calling out those for their illicit behavior has nothing to do with racism, but everything to do with personal responsibility and accountability.
The following claim by DiAngelo is so fallacious it is beyond fake.
"Racism is a society-wide dynamic that occurs at the group level. When I say that only whites can be racist, I mean that in the U.S., only whites have the collective social and institutional power and privilege over people of color."
Racism does not require group level participation. Any individual can and has the right to discriminate against those that are not a part of their group or personal persuasion; this is just a social-psychological fact of human interaction and groupthink. Moreover, blacks have as much social and institutional power as anyone else within their respective areas of their profession. In fact, as of late, blacks hold more collective social and institutional power and privilege over whites.
"David Wellman succinctly summarizes racism as "a system of advantage based on race." These advantages are referred to as white privilege, a sociological concept referring to advantages that are taken for granted by whites and that cannot be similarly enjoyed by people of color in the same context (government, community, workplace, schools, etc.)."
Well as previously detailed, Wellman needs to get a dictionary because that is not a summary or even a hint at what the actual definition of racism is. In short, he is factually inaccurate with that "summary."
White privilege is a myth created by the left to deflect from personal responsibility and accountability from people of color. White privilege is just a myth, period. A "concept" is NOT a fact. It is at best a theory, at worst flatulence.
The following are examples of actual privilege, black privilege, that gives blacks an advantage over whites:
Being black gives you carte blanche to murder white people and the mainstream media, along with everyone else afraid to be called a "racist" turns a blind eye. Fact: less than 2-3% of the 13-14% black American population commits over 50% of the entire nation's homicides and non-negligent manslaughters.
Hell, even after the Wisconsin Christmas Parade assailant plowed through the crowd, that story was dropped like a hot potato within days. Why? Simple. He was black. #BlackPrivilege
You can be a liar, antisemite, non-tax paying thief and shakedown companies for money over factually inaccurate claims of racism and get away with it, just like Jesse "Shakedown" Jackson and so-called Reverend Al Sharpton. Black Privilege. Sharpton bashes gays and STILL gets a television show on a cable network that champions LGBT rights. Go figure.
"You can be arrested for crack cocaine possession and still finish your term as mayor."
"You can threaten voters with bats at polling stations and never face prosecution by the DOJ"
"You can be the first Representative to be censured by the House in 30 years for tax evasion and illegal campaign financing and still get reelected indefinitely"
"You can be under investigation for voter registration fraud, have the entire warehouse of evidence be consumed in a mysterious fire, and get the investigation dropped."
"You can sit in a Church for 20 years where the Pastor preached White Hate and Damned America and still become President of the United States."
"You can make frequent trips to North Korea, hail the insane, murderous, tyrant of that country as a wonderful guy, and still be a loved celebrity in America."
"You can trash a talented conservative black actress with hateful streams of racist and misogynistic threats and immediately go back to tweeting about the evils of racism and #waronwomen without being called a hypocrite."
"You can wail about the injustice of one black youth being shot after attacking a Hispanic in Florida yet remain silent when 6 black youths beat a 78-year-old white man in revenge for that event."
And last but not least (or the end of the exhaustive list), you can get caught in scandal after scandal, lie after lie, violate the Constitution, and break federal law with impunity without ever having to worry about being impeached. Obama ring a bell, anyone!
This statement by DiAngelo is the crux of all white guilt mentality:
"Being perceived as white carries more than a mere racial classification; it is a social and institutional status and identity imbedded with legal, political, economic, and social rights and privileges that are denied to others."
Is it really? Or could it be because whites are simply not as violent as blacks and browns? Ever think of that!
As previously stated, black males are roughly 6% of the 13-14% black American population and yet half that (3%) commit over 50% of the nation's murders and non-negligent manslaughters. Browns, the extremely violent gangs like MS-13 need no explanation. Their infamy with violence speaks for itself.
While whites may be the dominate percentage of the nation's population, statistically whites are less violent than people of color. That is just a verifiable criminological fact. And that fact has nothing to do with "legal, political, economic, and social rights and privileges" since people of color, namely blacks, have absolutely far more "privilege" than whites do in this country.
This statement is pure bullshit on its face.
"To say that whiteness is a location of structural advantage is to recognize that to be white is to be privileged position within society and its institutions - to be seen as an insider and to be granted the benefits of belonging... This position automatically bestows unearned advantages."
What a crock! I am white. I had absolutely no advantage despite growing up in a middle-class lifestyle. While my father provided for our family, he was not exactly responsible, and he was mentally abusive.
I had no future in the town I grew up in, so I took personal responsibility and accountability for my future and made a choice. A choice that resulted in what has manifested into a prosperous future and a comfortable early retirement. None of that happened because I am white, it happened because I made it happen through the responsible choices I made. There are blacks with less who are more fortunate than I. Yet some of them have not been as fortunate as I simply because they made less than desirable choices with their life.
"Whites control all major institutions of society and set the policies and practices that others must live by." ... "Whites also produce and reinforce the dominant narratives of society -- such as individualism and meritocracy -- and use these narratives to explain the positions of other racial groups."
One of the most irritating positions people on the left argue is the fact that it lacks an understanding of proportionality of aggregate numbers compared to other numbers. When more than 70% of the total population is one particular race of individuals, it is not only logical but also common sense that that dominate part of the population will invariably control most of the institutions of that society and set policies, practices and make laws that others must adhere to, regardless of race, gender, creed, religion or otherwise.
And what, precisely, is wrong or detrimental to individualism and meritocracy? The individual has a lot to offer not only themselves, but others as well as society on the whole BASED ON their merit. I mean, a corner street drug dealer has nothing to offer anyone but misery and eventually death; be it their own or those they affect directly and/or indirectly. But a man (or woman) who stays the course, works hard, takes care of those close to them, and makes a difference in the world has merit and value to society. Sadly, as of late the criminal scum like George Floyd are praised and honored with memorials and statues while those with actual merit and put their lives on the line every day to protect and serve are ridiculed, scorned and discarded (i.e., - assassinated) like trash. Why? Because of white guilt liberal rhetoric like this scam artist and black liberal democrats who swallow this tripe hook line and sinker. As a result, American are berated with the following nonsensical unsubstantiated garbage:
"For sociologists and those involved in current racial justice movements, however, white supremacy is a descriptive and useful term to capture the all-encompassing centrality and assumed superiority of people defined and perceived as white and the practices based on this assumption." ... "White supremacy in this context does not refer to individual white people and their individual intentions or actions but to an overreaching political, economic, and social system of domination."
Again, proportionality is set aside for a sweeping hasty generalization fallacious argument attacking white people on the whole, an ad hominem argument, basically. The clear opposition to "whiteness" is the fact that those who are categorically ascribed the label as being "white" are the very ones who have moved western culture in a positive direction socially, economically, legally, prosperously, and globally while others simply feel left out because they failed to contribute to their fullest potential. Their lack of participation and feeling helpless to do so fuels the victimhood mentality that they are bombarded with by their so-called community leaders, democratic politicians and mainstream media peddling racist division and messages that they are utterly failures because of their race.
"(Charles) Mills makes two points that are critical to our understanding of white fragility. First, white supremacy is never acknowledged. Second, we cannot study any sociopolitical system without addressing how that system is mediated by race."
When you break everything down by race, whether or not race is even a factor in that breakdown, all you do is sow the seeds of racial paranoia that fuels further racial division premised on purposeful disinformation.
Thomas Sowell said it best... "Racism is not dead. But it is on life-support, kept alive mainly by the people who use it for an excuse or to keep minority communities fearful or resentful enough to turn out as a voting bloc on election day." The likes of Al Sharpton, Jesse "Shakedown" Jackson, Joy-Ann Reid, Ben Crump, Jeffrey "Shaun" King, Lee Merritt, Don Lemon, Jussie Smollett, and many more who thrive off of racial division, both personally as well as financially at the expense of those that they claim to help.
"White supremacy describes the culture we live in, a culture that positions white people and all that is associated with them (whiteness) as ideal."
When someone creates something that benefits the majority, if not all of humanity, is it not helpful, beneficial...ideal? As aforementioned, those ascribed the categorical label of being white are the very ones who have made the world a better place for all, despite the hiccups and shortcomings along the way. In the end, the world has been made better by those, who despite their shortcomings, still are the ones who took charge and made a difference that was helpful, beneficial and ideal for all of humanity. To complain about such progress is not only counterintuitive, but also counterproductive to the end result of that progress that benefits us all.
"White supremacy is more than the idea that whites are superior to people of color; it is the deeper premise that supports this idea -- the definition of whites as the norm or standard for human, and people of color as a deviation from that norm."
White supremacy being more than an idea that whites are superior to people of color? Um, that is the textbook definition of racism. So why not just call it racism; why create another term to say the same thing? The way blacks have been acting in America over the past decade, it has become abundantly clear that they think and believe that their race is superior to all others, which makes them racist, or a black supremist. The belief that one person's race is superior to another is transmittable to/among all races, not just Caucasians. Therefore, all races have the capability to believe they are more superior to any and/or every other race. That's just a fact of human nature, and blacks and browns are not immune from that fact.
"This does not mean that people of color do not play a part but that the full weight of responsibility rests with those who control the institutions."
Last I checked many of the democratic ran cities that have been the center of controversy over the past decade have been ran/operated by people of color, namely black Americans. If blacks are in control of the institutions in Ferguson, Baltimore, so on and so forth...then what does that say about them when the system there fails black Americans?
"If the schools in your area were racially segregated (as most schools in the US are), why didn't you attend school together? If this is because you lived in different neighborhoods, why did you live in different neighborhoods."
Children do not have a choice where they live, nor what school they attend. But while they are in the school, they do have the choice whom they associate with or not to associate with. People in this country have the freedom of association, to choose who they want to be around or not be around. There is no law, rule or otherwise that forces anyone to hang with anyone they don't want to hang with. It is precisely why black children have begun to separate themselves from anyone and everyone not black. Take the following stories, for example: Segregated Proms
Then there are books being written about this very same thing, once specific book was written by Beverly Daniel Tatum Ph.D., "Why are all the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?"
The hypocrisy of the left, white guilt liberals like DiAngelo, and racist black elitists who enjoy living off the misery of those they profess to help is beyond detrimental to this country.
Comments