Ten Ways (not all!) White Liberals Perpetuate Racism

[bravenak]

Denial:

Denying we could ever have racist thoughts, or that we reap the benefits as a member of the majority race, is a common defense of liberal White Americans. By denying the existence of our racist thoughts, we negate the depth of the racial divide.

"But I don't even see color."

As if by being color-blind we can resolve the racial pain people of color live out. Pendler and Beverly note, "An inability to be open to the possibility that the experience of the other could be valid is a consistent element of white supremacy."

2. Shame & Hurt:

When focus remains on the White person, and our emotional wounds, this is classic deflection and redirection.

"I'm so embarrassed I said that!"

This common phrase can be heard when something hurtful may have been said to a person of color. The truly injured party, however, remains unrecognized. By having the courage to confront a racial slight, a person of color is made to feel that they have misread us, or hurt our feelings.

We might also say: "I'm hurt that you think of me like that." This further draws the attention back to us, and away from the real issue of pain felt by the person of color. When sympathy transfers to the white person, no awareness or learning occurs. No trust is built.

Try this next time you're confronted with something insensitive: "I hear how my words or actions hurt you. Thank you for pointing that out to me."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/george-sachs-psyd/10-ways-white-liberals-pe_b_8068136.html

[bravenak]

1. This one is an opinion piece:

http://thegrio.com/2015/02/15/white-liberal-racists/

[ismnotwasm]

2. Damn this is good

Thank you, I hope people read it and understand

There's a problem when we champion change, then hide from it when it really counts. Like it or not, White superiority is well defended and protected. It may be unintentional. It's likely unconscious. Without more introspection and sincere interaction, the racism train keeps rolling.

Right now, you might feel angry and misjudged.

Maybe you're a white liberal shaking your head, feeling slighted and angered by the lack of acknowledgement, regarding your efforts and accomplishments concerning racial sensitivity. After all, white liberals are the white folks who really get it. Right?

Wrong. This is, in fact, another microinvalidation. Beverly and Pendler call that particular microaggression "attack by racial resume." We say, "Look at all the work I've done on behalf of people of color! I'm one of the good ones!"

[bravenak]

3. Perfect.

Nobody will read it but us, but this needs to be posted once a day by all of us until they do read it.

[F4lconF16]

5. Please do. I'll rec it every time. Nt

[ismnotwasm]

6. I got it bookmarked

I have a book I often refer too as well, from a sociology class I took around 15 years ago, "The Meaning of Difference"-- the last updated version was in 2011. Even though it's a college text, it moves me, as well as instructs me to this day

[bravenak]

10. I wish people here had taken just one damn class in sociology.

You know? I never took one. Have the text book, read it. But damn. They need it more, I can leave them the space.

[bravenak]

18. Wonderful!!

[bravenak]

21. I get this all the time, I'll quote you.

20. By the way
View profile
When Bernie wins the nomination, you WILL be voting for him, and you WILL enjoy it. Got that? You will vote exactly as you're told to. Do you seriously think your race ever meant more to us than votes? We do not care about you or your feelings, and there's nothing you can do about it. I mean what's the alternative - vote for Donald Trump?

Don't forget your place. We own you.

Very rude, newposter.

[JustAnotherGen]

24. He's mad because we didn't invite him to the get together

See - I told you we should invite name removed.

He's such a jolly one you know!

[bravenak]

25. I know!!

He feels so left out!!! I get it. Poor thing.

[strategery blunder]

26. Wow that's disgusting

No wonder the messages were actually removed instead of just hidden by jury. Blech.

Secret ballots exist for some damn good reasons. And nobody should ever take anyone else's vote for granted.

I usually avoid the primary wars around here and hold my vote close to my chest. Shit like that is a good example of why I do that.

FWIW, I did read the piece, and will have to re-read it again when it's not 2 AM on Black Friday (I work retail) and have more mental resources with which I can reflect upon it. But that little gem was so disgusting that I just had to say something.

[bravenak]

28. I think that one was pretending to be a Liberal.

Just to start a fire, you know? Expected me to blame the entirety of DU, but it was wrong.
I probably should have not even spoken to it, but that was a STRANGE POST. Terrible.

[strategery blunder]

29. I admit, at first I thought it was parody

And then I got to the line about "who ya gonna vote for, we own you!" and then recognized that it was some deeply nefarious shit.

Anyway I have to be opening a store in four and a half hours...I probably should not be playing with it, either.

*hands you a fire extinguisher before wandering off to find a pillow*

[bravenak]

31. Oh dang! Go to sleep!

Tomorrow will be brutal. Good night!

[mopinko]

91. the posts were removed because the person was banned

by mirt.
likely a zombie of many incarnations.

[strategery blunder]

100. I figured as such.

Looks like MIRT had its hands full.

[sheshe2]

83. Jaysus H Keyrist!

What the hell was that!?

[bravenak]

88. It must have been conservative cave.

They have fake liberal personas.

[sheshe2]

94. HA!

[bravenak]

96. I'm actually undercover there right now!! Like Trumad!

You should see the stuff they say...

[Cha]

170. Wow.. BS poster.. and they're wondering why their campaigning in bernie's name

with aggressive behavior is not winning him any votes. Sounds like mr citizen, no? A little?

[bravenak]

173. I forgot about him. Yes. Ewww!

Let me tell ya, it is NOT HELPFUL. At all.

[Mister Ed]

59. People, please do take 3 or 4 minutes to go and read the linked article.

It's wise, warm, thoughtful, compassionate, and concise. It will take less of your time than it takes to skim some of the trashier comments in this thread, and it will sure do a lot more for you.

[femmedem]

50. A terrific quote from a terrific article.

I was going to post that quote if you hadn't gotten to it first.

[scarletwoman]

77. "Look at all the work I've done on behalf of people of color! I'm one of the good ones!" - too true!

In fact, there was one DUer here who posted that very sentiment, almost word for word, this past summer when BLM showed up at Netroots Nation. This poster simply could not get over the fact that Sanders' speech had been interrupted - was in fact so emotionally upset by it that they refused to calm down or even attempt to listen to anyone who proposed that there might be a different way of perceiving that event - to view it as an opportunity for demonstrating genuine solidarity with the aims of BLM.

This poster would have none of it. They didn't need to be educated on racism, they didn't have a racist bone in their body, they had worked for years in inner city schools, they had done nothing but help black people. Their cri-du-coeur was basically, "After all I have done for those people!"

That person spent literally days in meltdown over the Netroots event, there was no moving them even a hair away from their sense of outraged injury. I gave up.

There's a problem when we champion change, then hide from it when it really counts.

And that's exactly how it goes - we're all for "change" as long as it happens according to our timetable and our parameters and our white sensibilities. We certainly don't have any intention of giving up control over defining what the change should be and how it should be accomplished. Because we know best, right?

[MADem]

176. LOL @ "I'm one of the good ones!" There's some history there!

It wasn't all that long ago when THAT shoe was on the other foot!

Probably the daddy or granddaddy of that "good one" was a guy who said "Oh, you don't have to worry about old (so-and-so); he's one of the 'good ones!'"

[F4lconF16]

4. Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes

From another millenial

[betsuni]

7. K&R!

[F4lconF16]

8. Another comment...

I was in a park a while back when a couple of Mormons wandered by. They said their usual crap, I was with my rather religious girlfriend, so I played nice, and they moved to three black guys sitting a couple feet away on the bench.

This proceeded to become quite hilarious as one of them tore the missionaries a new one for their depiction on Jesus as white. It would have been uncomfortable except for the fact that I really don't need your religious bs when I'm trying to have lunch on a sunny day, and I really like watching them squirm (no sympathy, you proseletize, you gotta be able to answer tough questions).

Now, I have a tendency to not keep my mouth shut when I should, but I happened to have the picture NatGeo assembled of Jesus as a middle eastern dude on my phone. Since they were just talking to me and only moved a foot to my right since, I figured I could pop in and rejoin the conversation.

It was a stupid idea. No sooner did I do so than the guy rounded on me, cussing me out for trying to fight his battles, talking about how whites always think they know what's right. He made a couple of (rather inventive) disparaging remarks about me involving his black on top white on bottom nikes and I backed off, partially since he was pushing up in my physical space too. (The mormons gtfo as soon as they saw an opportunity, a pity.)

I've visited that incident a few times since in my mind, and I know I screwed up. The other two guys there didn't care they actually asked to see the picture after the rant was over, but the other guy was still pissed.

It took me a bit to understand what pissed him off so much. It wasn't my comment, it was my inserting myself where I didn't need to be. He wasn't looking for white validation, or even my thoughts at all. He knew exactly what he wanted to say to them, and I wasn't a part of that. I should have shut up and enjoyed the show.

But one of the best things I did in that moment was to back off and shut up. If I hadn't, I would have gotten defensive, and probably would have walked away without learning a thing. Thinking about our actions, even if we don't apologize until we understand what we did, is far better than lying to ourselves and to those we've hurt/angered/etc. I'm happy enough that the other guys gave me the space and that chance to talk with them for a few seconds after.

Figuring out our privilege is much more than figuring out what we did in that moment. It's looking back on it again to learn from it again, remembering it. This isn't to say we need to guilt trip ourselves, but we can't forget those moments and those lessons.

Fighting privilege is not an apology or an understanding. It's a lifelong struggle to realize our mistakes and our differences, and overcome them. Everything in this article is going to happen to us all at one point or another. We have to understand that, and constantly check ourselves.

Most importantly, we have to be honest about when we fuck up.

[bravenak]

9. Ohhh snap!! I got them once too with my Boss, Jim Bookie.

I had no idea about that group since I was 16. Now THAT was a time for inserting oneself and boy did he ever. He cut them with a thousand snarky remarks and questions about thrir religion. Can she be clergy? How many blacks are clergy? Does she need a husband to say her secret name so she can go to his planet? My god. I knew none of that stuff. But he was about 80 and sick of their crap.
You know what? That man is still alive and sticking it to any mf that gets on his nerves as he works 6 days a week at 93. We didcussed Mitt Romey a few years ago. He had PLENTY to say about believers in magic.

[bravenak]

12. What does this have to do with Sanders?

Not everything is about him.

[Scootaloo]

13. "Manspreader"?

...I gotta admit, that's... that's a new one. And I can't say the visual the word conjurs settles well, but that's proably a problem on my end.

[JustAnotherGen]

30. That sounds nasty

Ewwwww

[bravenak]

32. Remember the NY subways? That thing where guys take up two seats.

[Scootaloo]

70. Oh.

Now I remember. That thing that kinda of proved outrage has fads, too.

[pnwmom]

35. You are not in GDP, where discussions of primary candidates

Last edited Tue Dec 1, 2015, 03:22 AM - Edit history (1)

are supposed to be confined.

Bravenak should be able to discuss racism in General Discussion without everyone trying to tie it to Bernie Sanders.

[Cha]

172. Really. WTF does racism have to do with BS? Can't we have a break from him? Please?

[bravenak]

19. Hmm

14. The only person perpetuating racism here
View profile
Is you with your incessant racebaiting.

That is very rude, newposter.

[Tarheel_Dem]

38. When you hear an alleged "liberal" use the term "race baiting" or "race nagging", you know exactly..

what you're dealing with, and it's not good.

[bravenak]

40. You are so right.

I learned alot this year about that type. I do not consider them liberal. Uneducated on Race, perhaps. Sad to see so many of them.

[Number23]

74. Girl... as usual, you AIN'T LYING

When you hear an alleged "liberal" use the term "race baiting" or "race nagging", you know exactly.. what you're dealing with, and it's not good.

It ain't good. It ain't EVER good.

[darkangel218]

22. You're looking for "racism" in all the wrong places.

Those accusations are getting old.

You should be ashamed of yourself for always trying to tie Bernie to racism.


Shame on you!

[JustAnotherGen]

27. I seriously didn't see one word in the article about Senator Sanders

Heres the first few paragraphs -

Last week an article was published in the September issue of the The Atlantic titled "The Coddling of the American Mind."

The goal of the article was to show that college students (a.k.a. Millennials) are increasingly rigid in their language, especially those words or phrases involving race, gender, religion, or any other target status. This is commonly referred to as political correctness.

The authors' thesis was that "college students are increasingly demanding protection from words and ideas they don't like." They go on to conclude that this political correctness is unhealthy and "disastrous" for education and mental health.

The photograph that accompanied the article was of a small child, age three or four, sitting at a desk with the words "college" written across his sweatshirt. The Atlantic was sending a clear message: College students are immature babies.

I read this article with disbelief. It reminded me of the language debates of the sixties and seventies when college students were at the front-line of desegregation, choosing to use words that appeared rigid in their day, but in historic terms, were at the vanguard of contemporary thought about race.

My take away - its about the general climate.

I'm on a first generation iPad and I don't think I can word scan. Still I'm 99% sure that Sanders is nowhere in the link. Is it in the second one? The opinion piece?

ETA - Read the second one . . . I have read it before - no Mention of Sanders there. However in light of some rather dismissive posts of black collegians paying hard earned money and incurring massive debt to University/College protesting and making demands for their dollars last week (I didn't see youn engage in that nonsense so not talking about you) it's a good read.

[pnwmom]

33. You're looking for discussions about primary candidates in all the wrong places.

This is NOT GD-Primaries.

Please confine yourself to General Discussion that's not about primary candidates.

[Tarheel_Dem]

39. The author could have had Donald Trump in mind, why did your mind go directly to BS? Hhhmmm.....

[brer cat]

46. Where does this come from?

The article linked in the OP has absolutely nothing to do with Bernie or the primaries. If anyone should be "ashamed" it is you for attacking Bravenak for something that exists only in your head, and is totally unrelated to the OP. btw, you are doing a great job tying Bernie to racism by bringing his name into the thread. Unnecessary defensiveness doesn't help your candidate, it only points out that maybe there is a problem in the minds of his supporters.

[Squinch]

53. Oh, FFS.

Get help.

I've trashed the Bernie forum and GDP, and I STILL can't get away from this idiocy.

[tammywammy]

72. GMAFB

Not every thing posted her has to do with the primaries, especially since this was posted in GD. Though it does make me wonder why an article on racism makes you want to defend Bernie.

[Shankapotomus]

34. Okay I read the whole article

Correct me if I'm wrong but is the final message of this article "Once you are accused of racism, albeit overt or through a micro aggression...there is no legitimate way to challenge that accusation."

In other words, the accusation itself becomes an undeniable proof immune and resistant to any correction or deeper investigation by the accused?

Or do I have that wrong?

[bravenak]

42. You have it wrong.

If somebody checks you, do not make it about your feelings, is what it says. You may be in the wrong and not know it. Listen to what they say. You do not necessarily have to say anything.

[Shankapotomus]

45. I get not making it about feelings

But what about logic?

If someone is unfairly accused of racism should they just accept that verdict and say nothing?

[brer cat]

51. I think the point

being made, as bravenak said above, is that we have to listen and be willing to move away from "me" to "you" whether it is feelings or our sense of logic. The fact is that whites in general fail to always recognize racism no matter how much empathy we feel. If we are defensive (that's "unfair&quot we are continuing to make it about "me" and invalidating the person of color. As Sachs points out, "When sympathy transfers to the white person, no awareness or learning occurs. No trust is built."

Saying nothing misses a major point of the article. We need to focus on what and how we say it. "Can I simply say: 'I wasn't aware my words or actions hurt you. Tell me more so I can learn?'"

[Shankapotomus]

56. I agree

There shouldn't be a knee-jerk and defensive reaction by the accused if someone has concerns that a comment or behavior of theirs might be racist in nature.

However, once the formality of taking the other person's feelings of injury into account has been made, there is still the unfinished job of actually determining whether a comment or behavior was actually racist in nature.

As bravnek included in her subject line, not all white people engage in racism so it follows misunderstandings resulting in unfair accusations will arise from time to time.

How can such misunderstandings be resolved if any disagreement of such a conclusion is regarded as racism itself?

[brer cat]

58. I think we all agree that not all white people

engage in racism, although even those of us with the best intentions can make racially insensitive comments without realizing it. So the question is whether accusations can be unfair. My view is that if a person of color says something is racist, then it is. As a white person, I cannot dispute it as a fact, only speak to my intention which is a different matter. That is where there needs to be discussion of why I failed to see the racism in my comment or action. Unless something has been taken out of context entirely, the onus is on me to try to understand, not on the offended person to defend why they are offended.

Thus, I don't think that discussing a misunderstanding is a problem, it is how we frame that discussion: not "you misunderstood me", but "how did I fail to see how you would perceive it?"

[BKH70041]

68. But there's a major problem there.

"My view is that if a person of color says something is racist, then it is."

Believing that discounts the probability that a PoC would intentionally make the claim when even they know it's not true. IOW, they intentionally lie about something said to them as being racist.

So the question remains, how does one defend themself against a false accusation? Because given your POV, you can't. I can tell you this; if someone can't "dispute it as a fact," then there's going to be a whole bunch of people who are just going to throw up their hands and quit trying. I don't think that's the end result that's desired, but it will turn out being the reality.

[brer cat]

80. Bringing lying into this

is pretty far-fetched, imo. I can't imagine that lying about whether something is racist is a very common occurrence, much less a "probability." As far as defending against a lie, I don't think it is possible to have productive conversations with people who are lying, and I wouldn't attempt it.

[BKH70041]

101. Not really.

People lie about all sorts of things that would make the average person slap their forehead and wonder what they were thinking. So, is it possible that it could happen? Sure it is. There's no way to claim that it's impossible. So given that it's possible, then to say that the PoC making the accusation is to be believed without question isn't realistic.

See, I can't buy into that narrative. If I say something that's not racist, but a PoC claims they took it that way, and I go through the appropriate motions of trying to determine why they have made that accusation regarding what I said, and upon their explanation I realize they're making up shit, I'm going to call them out on it. I don't know what reasonable person wouldn't. I'm certainly not going to have someone claiming I'm doing something that I know damn well I'm not and just sit back and take it. That's not how the real world works.

.

[kwassa]

109. Here is the problem with your approach.

You might go through those motions, determine that they are full of shit, and be wrong. The reason you might be wrong is that the transgression you are committing is invisible to you, as it is outside of any of your life experience. You can't have that life experience without growing up African-American.

As you probably can't see the underlying assumption you are leaning on, which is that all racist acts are immediately understandable by you.

[BKH70041]

125. Maybe I'm wrong, but maybe I'm right.

That's all I'm reading in your post.

If they give me an explanation that makes sense, I would admit it and make amends. But, if I determine it's not, then no, I'm not going to just sit there and "just take it." That's not how the world works.

And your last paragraph misses the point that the person leveling the accusation could be lying. Someone lying to me certainly isn't going to help me come to a better understanding, unless the lesson learned is that I can't trust them because they're going to lie to me or make shit up.

[kwassa]

145. You didn't understand my post.

f they give me an explanation that makes sense, I would admit it and make amends. But, if I determine it's not, then no, I'm not going to just sit there and "just take it." That's not how the world works.

What you, and many others here are unwilling to admit is that there are things you can't experience. You merely declare "that's the world works" as if that is a self-evident truism, and it isn't, it is just your personal opinion of how the world works. You also see the world from the viewpoint of person privileged enough to be white and take many things for granted that a minority can't.

[brer cat]

110. Sure all types of people can lie.

But that is not remotely related to the points that Sachs is making. He is talking about how words and phrases white people use can be racially insensitive regardless of our intentions, and how our defenses when confronted can make the situation worse. It is not what white people think they know, it is what a person of color perceives as racist that is the central issue, and that is why I believe racism is what a Black person or other poc tells me it is.

If you are confronted by people who are "making up shit" to call you a racist, then you are dealing with a totally different situation. No one has to accept what a liar says regardless of what the subject is. But to deflect from my point that people of color, not white people, know what is racist because you believe some people lie sounds like a defense that you are using. Maybe not, but it is directing the conversation into a discussion of people who lie rather than liberals who engage in subtle racism. I don't think liars are worth any of our time, but self-reflection about the words we use and our defenses certainly are.

[BKH70041]

126. Here's my point.

The conversation I have with people on a daily basis, regardless of gender or race or anything else, are usually just your average run-of-the-mill talk. I can't think of a single time when a PoC has accused me of racism because most of my casual conversations with anyone are the typical how are you, how's work, how's the family, heard your mom was sick and is she doing better, did you watch that game, etc.... So I highly doubt what we're discussing here will ever grace my door.

But, having said that, the possibility that a PoC acting in a malicious manner could throw out a accusation of racism when it didn't happen because they believe it's to their advantage to do so is something that could happen, no matter how remote a possibility. It's a nasty, shameful thing to do, but it can happen. I think individuals would do a great disservice to actual racism taking place by willingly accepting a false accusation towards themselves rather than taking it head on. Besides, people just aren't going to sit back and allow themselves to treated that way. It's wishful thinking if someone were to believe people won't stand up for themselves. And I couldn't blame them.

Take Care.

[Shankapotomus]

95. Not only that

but consider the complexity that will arise when two different minorities cry foul against each other.

Whose offense supersedes the other's?

For instance, if a PoC says a white person with a disability is privileged and the person with a disability responds by accusing the PoC of able splainin' and not understanding disability, whose feelings take precedence?

Do they just go back and forth accusing each other of denial and micro aggressions?

[1StrongBlackMan]

128. Has that happenned to you much? ...

Believing that discounts the probability that a PoC would intentionally make the claim when even they know it's not true. IOW, they intentionally lie about something said to them as being racist.

If so, have you given much thought to why that might be happening ... here's a hint:

discounts the probability that a PoC would intentionally make the claim when even they know it's not true

[1StrongBlackMan]

127. Perfect ...

"Can I simply say: 'I wasn't aware my words or actions hurt you. Tell me more so I can learn?'"

Just perfect ... But not getting through ... because "I am not a racist", is the beginning and end of the discussion.

[aikoaiko]

81. AFAICT, The best response is to STFU, listen, and agree by repeating every word exactly.

Last edited Fri Nov 27, 2015, 08:56 PM - Edit history (2)

Again, as far as I can tell. I don't ever see anyone say, "you know, you're right, that might not be racism."

I've been told I am wrong about this, but I really don't see examples to the contrary.

[Squinch]

84. Somehow, I am not surprised that you don't ever hear anyone say that.

[1StrongBlackMan]

151. I know ...

that should give that poster reason to self-reflect.

[Squinch]

156. Should, but won't.

[1StrongBlackMan]

157. That was the third post in as many days of DUers ...

having been accused of doing/saying racist ... apparently, more than once and by one than one person; but, each time, the DUer didn't say/do anything racist.

I have said before ... that, for some, the message will never get through because the interaction begins and ends with, "I am not a racist, so I couldn't possibly so or say anything that could be taken that way."

[Tarheel_Dem]

36. "But I don't even see color."

[bravenak]

43. I hate that one.

[AgingAmerican]

37. You are the only one perpetuating it here

Daily.

Enough of your hatred. Have a nice life.

[bravenak]

41. Some show up constantly to insult me.

[Bryce Butler]

44. Results of alert

On Fri Nov 27, 2015, 06:09 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

You are the only one perpetuating it here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7386124

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Look at the op. then look at her second post. "you are the only one perpetuating it here (racism) daily. "Enough of your hatred". He point blank accused the poster of being a racist and posting racist things at DU daily. Step back and put your feelings about the op in another compartment. skinner has point blank stated that accusing another DUer of being a racist is a hide worthy offense. Look for Manny Goldstein posts from Feb 2013 in the African American group. If calling Manny a racist is hide worthy then calling bravenak a racist should be hide worthy. We have to start bring objective about posters and their behavior or this site wont be able to come together when Berne wins!

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Nov 27, 2015, 06:19 AM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I'm not going to hide, because I think the poster put this post in the wrong place...an easy thing to do, I've done it myself. It just doesn't follow, otherwise, in the thread.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: This post is disruptive, rude.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I do not see this comment as accusing the OP of being a racist, but feeding the meme of racism. Not the same thing in my book.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Number23]

75. LOL I'd love to say I'm surprised by that jury but I'd be lying through my teeth

[ProfessorGAC]

149. Really?

That seems quite unreasonable. Juries that don't vote exactly as you would are inherently in error? Wow! That seems awfully self-aggrandizing.

[Number23]

153. However much time it took you to type this, you wasted it

Your unasked for, completely unnecessary, and 3 day late attempt to chastise people as if anyone cares about your opinion seems far more "self aggrandizing" than someone merely commenting that a post that adds nothing to the discussion except to attack someone should have been hidden.

[ProfessorGAC]

154. Pffft!

Whatever. Been here a long time. Been on lots of juries. I make my decisions without regard to how someone else might criticize it.

You really think this constitutes an attack? You made a sweeping criticism of juries. You disagree with the decision. Fine. That doesn't make it wrong just because you say so.

Your post, BTW, is much closer to a personal attack than i think you believe it to be. To whit: "Your unasked for, completely unnecessary, and 3 day late attempt to chastise people as if anyone cares about your opinion. . ."

Nobody here needs to be asked to give an opinion. Everyone is free to type whatever they like and don't need permission.

[Number23]

155. Someone calls a poster a race baiter, a jury doesn't hide it, I comment "I wish I was surprised by

that jury but I'd be lying through my teeth" and somehow, it's MY post that's the one that's got you all up in arms three days later??

Bye "professor."

[Starry Messenger]

49. Thanks for being kind enough to provide an example.

[AgingAmerican]

69. Op after Op after Op after Op

Always the same theme. White progressives (their buzz word for Sanders supporters) are racists. Attacking Democrats for their genetics. Adopting the blind hatred of the oppressors, but turning it inward against their own allies. This OP is no different.

"The dispossessed of this country the poor, the white and Negro live in a cruelly unjust society. they must organize a revolution against that injustice, not against the lives of the persons who are their fellow citizens, but against the structures through which society is refusing to take means which have been called for, and which are at hand, to lift the load of poverty." - MLK

http://wwsword.blogspot.com/2008/01/this-is-king-i-remember.html

MLK was the least racist person who ever existed, and this was the 50s and 60s Deep South he was dealing with. MLK saw the oppressors as victims too. Victims of their own ignorance and their own bigoted power structure (white privilege). He saw the futility of hating the oppressor, because hate never wins. He fought for every poor person, not just POC. He didn't attack people for their skin color like many here do. They can run away from MLK, but when they do so they are AUTOMATICALLY WRONG. Hatred blinds and poisons. Hatred = failure.

A shout out to my alert stalker! His writing style always gives him away!

[bravenak]

85. I have no idea why you follow me to insult me

[AgingAmerican]

138. If MLKs words insult you

That's on you.

"The dispossessed of this country the poor, the white and Negro live in a cruelly unjust society. they must organize a revolution against that injustice, not against the lives of the persons who are their fellow citizens, but against the structures through which society is refusing to take means which have been called for, and which are at hand, to lift the load of poverty." - MLK

[bravenak]

140. Mmmm hmmm

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

47. I was once called to jury duty in Northern California

It was a work discrimination case. I got as far as the interview process. One of the questions was "have you ever heard someone make a racial slur?" Person after person said no, never, to the point where I began to wonder what isolated planet they were from. When they asked me, I said, yes, of course, and that I didn't like it. I was excused and I wondered why.

[Shankapotomus]

48. You were most likely excused

Because they were looking for jurors that didn't have any past in judging instances of racist behavior to eliminate all possibility of bias one way or the other.

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

54. I just don't buy that people have never ever heard racial slurs

[ismnotwasm]

63. That's a good point

Another aspect is listening to or making racist jokes, allowing racism to go on from friends and relatives without attempting to call it out.

As I grew older, I found myself with less and less patience for it--and it's everywhere. I don't tolerate it. My workplace has a zero tolerance policy thank goodness, and I can manage everything else. The Internet is where I see the most unbridled racism these days.

For me, It always stars with self examination.

[bravenak]

93. I agree

[Juicy_Bellows]

111. They were looking for people who are comfortable lying.

Typical lawyers.

[LiberalArkie]

134. They were looking for people who do not see "You $% $#$%# NI%$&*(" as being racist

they are looking for people to consider that as a normal conversation with someone of a different color or ethnic background.

[brer cat]

52. That is a great analysis, bravenak.

I found much food for thought. Bookmarking to reread again later.

K&R

[bravenak]

121. I thought so too.

Very well thought out.

[Waiting For Everyman]

55. A movement that thinks it can dictate to others

how to react to its message (even more so that it's about equality), always cracks me up. I think it's the complete lack of any connection with logic or the real world, promoted with a straight face.

Just as bullshit wrapping itself in the flag or religion is bogus, it's exactly the same when wrapped in any other outwardly good cause.

But the pretense at awareness along with it is really rich.

[Marr]

87. Yep.

We're seeing more and more of this, and it's hilariously out of touch. People basically say, 'when debating with us, the proper procedure is to listen and silently nod in agreement until we're done describing exactly how awful you are, then go away'.

Oookay. Good luck with that.

[Nye Bevan]

57. These articles always complain about people saying "I don't see color".

But I've never in my life heard anyone claim that. Searching for the phrase on DU brings up only posts complaining about the phrase, not anyone making the claim.

It's kind of a silly thing to say, anyway; how can soneone not "see color"? I would suggest that most DUers do indeed "see color" but really don't give a shit about what color someone is and don't treat them any differently based upon it.

[MrScorpio]

60. The key problem in this country is white supremacy, and white liberals are not unaffected by it

http://www.salon.com/2015/04/10/white_americas_racial_illiteracy_why_our_national_conversation_is_poisoned_from_the_start_partner/

White America’s racial illiteracy: Why our national conversation is poisoned from the start

The author of "What Does It Mean to Be White?" examines the ways white people implode when they talk about race

DR. ROBIN DIANGELO, THE GOOD MEN PROJECT

I am white. I have spent years studying what it means to be white in a society that proclaims race meaningless, yet is deeply divided by race. This is what I have learned: Any white person living in the United States will develop opinions about race simply by swimming in the water of our culture. But mainstream sources—schools, textbooks, media—don’t provide us with the multiple perspectives we need.

Yes, we will develop strong emotionally laden opinions, but they will not be informed opinions. Our socialization renders us racially illiterate. When you add a lack of humility to that illiteracy (because we don’t know what we don’t know), you get the break-down we so often see when trying to engage white people in meaningful conversations about race.

[bravenak]

90. Hard to even discuss, even with liberals

[mcar]

61. Really good information

Thanks for this.

[earthside]

62. Blather and self-indulgence.

It's been done before ... the "radical chic" of the late 1960s.

Self-loathing white people who simply cannot express enough rather sanctimonious guilt about race, ethnicity, privilege, etc.

It is this kind of thinking and the 'wine and cheese liberal' image that led to Democrats being kept out of the White House for 24 years -- the four years of Jimmy Carter excepted -- 1968 to 1992.

I was an active Democrat during those years ... so I remember.

If there is anything disconnected, conceited, snobby and elitist it is articles like this that purported know-it-alls like George Sachs that only make the cultural divisions in this country worse. We are all supposed to put on sackcloth, rub ashes in our mouths and wallow in guilt ... that's the first step to confronting injustice and inequality for those well off enough to indulge in that kind of self-reproach.

Ironic how Sachs also generalizes and stereotypes 'Millennials' ... not all of these young people are as whiny as the ones we have been reading and hearing about lately. I know this because I am the parent of two individuals who are included in that thusly labeled generational cohort. Like most Americans of all kinds, they are mostly concerned with getting an affordable education, paying their health insurance premium and keeping their job.

What an absolutely horrible article and I sure hope that liberal leaders and opinion-makers categorically reject and challenge this kind of mushy-headedness ... or Democrats will end up out of power for another two decade era.

[ismnotwasm]

66. It's not about "white guilt"

A reactionary "oh please salve my feelings term" It's about "White responsibility"

And I while I wasn't "there" I do know the times are a changing to paraphrase a old song.

The OP *is* a millenial.

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

64. Shutting down or going blank #3

I often do that. Often it is because I just can't think of anything to say that won't make it about me instead of you. I almost didn't write this, because I didn't want to make it about me. I am looking inward and trying to listen.

This is thought provoking. Thank you.

[Comrade Grumpy]

65. Ah, the daily harangue.

[ismnotwasm]

67. So sad for you.

[Comrade Grumpy]

71. Terribly so. I do try to muddle through regardless, though.

Thanks for your concern.

[bravenak]

113. How did I miss this awesome post?

[Comrade Grumpy]

114. It's understandable. Nobody wants to deal with microinvalidations.

They're microinvalidating and probably microdebilitating.

[bravenak]

116. I can barely move now.

I'm feeling microabused and micromadefunof.

[LanternWaste]

150. many are compelled to view discussions and concerns about race in America as a "daily harangue

No doubt, many are compelled to view discussions and concerns about race in America as a "daily harangue' to better validate their biases and reflexive denials of the obvious.

Yet that criticism, lacking any substantive evidence to support the claim leaves the rational thinker to believe it's little more than a bumper-sticker. An irony to be sure, and an irony sure to be denied.

[Number23]

73. Great piece, b! I love the bit about "microinvalidations" which I mentioned in another thread

A white Sanders supporter was practically begging other white Sanders supporters to stop comparing Sanders to MLK or trying to use MLK to prop up Sanders. It was astonishing to me the number of people who were actually angry that someone asked them to stop doing something so ignorant, offensive and counter-productive.

So here we have a white Sanders supporter (rightfully) calling out the behavior and actions of other white Sanders supporters telling them that they were doing something offensive and the response was basically "we don't care" or even better, "it's only making people uncomfortable because it's TRUE."

That was a classic example of a microinvalidation. Alot of white people are unfortunately, very good at dismissing the concerns of poc which is why we have asked so many clued in whites to serve almost as emissaries to white people. But this was an example of a white person saying something that was about as big a no-brainer as you could get to his fellow whites and they just brushed it off. Like "if our stealing the hero of a marginalized community for political purposes upsets members of that community, then that's too bad." It was unreal. And we see this kind of crap EVERY SINGLE DAY. And like the author said, this is why racism will not die.

Thanks for posting this.

[Nye Bevan]

79. "Microinvalidation" = GREAT new word,

on a par with "microagression" and "trigger warning". I can see this word really catching on.

[Marr]

92. It's a word for a human jellyfish.

'Microinvalidation'... jesus. I can't even imagine the sort of thin skin and intellectual arrogance a person would have to have in order to even think up a concept like that. In some subtle, possibly unintentional way, another person has appeared to disagree with your opinions.

lmfao.

[kwassa]

103. Not at all. I don't think you understand the concept.

To put it simply, it is about white people dismissing the views of black people because it doesn't correspond to the white people's personal experience. Because whites hold the power in our society, their opinions have the power to invalidate the opinions of black people.

That dismissal can take a wide variety of different forms, hence the 10 ways outlined in this article.

[Marr]

120. I both understand it, and think it's silly.

It seems that the only acceptable response is to say nothing and nod in vigorous agreement. Anything else is a 'microinvalidation'.

This is little more than an appeal to emotion to short out any actual discussion. It's an insistence that only one side of any given issue has the authority to speak; aka, the one who can best describe themselves as the victim. It's what's wrong with the dialogue-- scratch that-- monologue on so many campuses. There's no real discussion, just a race to have the most hurt feelings; the highest moral horse.

[jack_krass]

132. And for...

self-flatuating idiots to one-up each other trying to "apologize for" the entire white race

[bravenak]

86. Some are very wrapped up in their righteousness.

They do not see how bad they look and they do not care. And they are losing.

[U4ikLefty]

141. ^^^Irony. nt

[bravenak]

142. I have reason.

[U4ikLefty]

143. The bullies always think that.

I'm going to microdismiss you now and go run some errands.

[bravenak]

144. LOL. One woman, bullying the entire forum? On her own thread? LOL NO. Makes no sense.

[Monk06]

164. It seems to me the left has replaced debate with the idle manufacture of neologisms as if inventing

new words with a vaguely technical meaning adds to a discussion

Well with microvalidation at least microagression has a new friend

[Number23]

165. Thanks for that ever so pithy comment. And for kicking the thread.

[Monk06]

166. And thank you for microvalidating my succinct criticism of pointless vocabulary inflation/

[Number23]

177. It's as "succinct" as it was pithy!

[Monk06]

178. A pithy comment is succinct by definition. Are you attempting to be ironic? If so your irony lacks

pregnancy.

This is a cool game and like baseball it could go on forever without a winner

[Number23]

179. "Your irony lacks pregnancy"

And thus endeth the game...

[Monk06]

180. As in pregnant pause. Lacking depth and fullness. Is English your second language?

Your pose of intellectual superiority is ridiculous and I am embarrassed for you

[Number23]

181. The person who wrote, apparently without a trace of irony himself, "your irony lacks pregnancy" is

now accusing SOMEONE ELSE of pretending to possess "intellectual superiority."

Yeah, I'm done here. Physician, heal thyself.

[Number23]

185. Told you the game was over. Perhaps you should have just listened

The fact that even something as potentially benign as this leads to insults and name calling is truly pitiful. That old adage about people with the least to say being the first to resort to insults is definitely apropos here.

[jonno99]

76. When I see stements like the following, it makes me question the authenticity of the person:

'I say to myself, when images of police brutality flash on the screen. "I'm not like those white people." '

To me, the more natural reaction is: "WTF is wrong with those guys!!!???". Perhaps I'm reading too much into it, but in the above author's statement it sounds like someone who is trying too hard. Having said that, I do think the article was helpful.

And I think that it is worth saying that while caucasians could benefit from the authors points, PoC could keep in mind that if they receive push-back or attitude, it may have nothing to do with racial bias, rather, it may simply indicate that their own behavior and attitude is off-putting.

IOW - the path to peace goes both ways...

[jack_krass]

124. "it may simply indicate that their own behavior and attitude is off-putting"

BINGO!

[romanic]

78. I'll admit

I just don't trust white liberals involved in academia. With recent events it's obvious why I side-eye them.

[bravenak]

89. I don't trust anybody

[aikoaiko]

82. About point #2

How come so many members of the AfAm group appear to really support white DUers apologizing for their own or others posting behavior in DU when this OP says doing so perpetuates racism?

[bravenak]

99. We don't need them to do that. But they feel awful, I undérstand why some try.

But it is unnecessary and we are not face to face.
If we were, the body language would tell the tale.

[SusanCalvin]

131. Thanks for understanding.

BTW, I took your (very good) advice and trashed GD: P. It made Home and Greatest look so much more interesting! Should have done it a long time ago. It's not like anything I could say there would make any difference, I finally see.

And not that I was learning much except for how much not listening was going on.

Hey, I was just considering trashing the Bernie group, and I don't have to! My first block! Huzzah!

[bravenak]

137. LOL, that's my one block too.

I swear things straighten up once certain groups are gone. There is so much good stuff in gd that gets ignored.

[m-lekktor]

97. I was glad the author of the piece provided a link to a pdf of "The Racism Root Kit"

at the end, which i downloaded for later reading. I found nothing objectionable about this piece, it made sense to me. It was a good review of specifics I have read about/discussed before on this topic!

[bravenak]

98. Thank you!

I thought it was VERY well researched.

[loyalsister]

104. Thanks for posting!

The Atlantic article infuriated me because I know some of the students and have had a chance to listen to what they have to say. One point they have had to reiterate is "this is about US!" while white people have tried to intrude and make it about them. For those of us who are white, it's time to listen and be willing to admit to ingnorance and having been wrong about a lot of things for a long time.

[bravenak]

105. I agree, thank you.

[tishaLA]

106. thanks for another great thread, brave

it won't get the recs it should because some have decided to plug their ears by putting you on ignore rather than engaging in the conversation--or worse, accusing you of race nagging or, in the new parlance, "your daily harangue." It's a pity because it's not good enough just to be better than repubs: it's important to be better than we (all) are now.

[bravenak]

107. Thank you

I know many are ignoring me, and imo, that might best best for ME. They think they are just fine and I'm bothering them. I find it to be sad, but I can only reach those who will listen.

[LuvNewcastle]

108. What all of this racial shit, and a lot

of other things that divide humans, comes down to is that we can't get over these bodies that we have. The bodies get in the way of souls sharing with each other. There is pleasure in having flesh, but it comes at a steep price.

[Juicy_Bellows]

112. I loved your post - thought I'd let ya know!

Cheers!

[LuvNewcastle]

123. Cheers!

[icymist]

115. Thank you for posting this.

I am learning here. You are giving me faith in the Millennial generation. And hope for humanity.

[bravenak]

117. Well, thank you!

I hope we can get things right.

[gwheezie]

118. Thank you for another thought provoking post

And mostly intelligent discussion. Of course not all white people™ are offended by the article.
I might have to ™ this isn't about Bernie also.

[bravenak]

119. Yeah, I had to slip the not all! in there.

I wish they would seriously calm down on thinking that everything is a swipe at Bernie or them personally. I like to discuss this topic and have before Bernie ever decided to run.

[jack_krass]

129. This article, and others like it...

Are, IMO, a perversion of an important ideal that many fought and died for (many of them white liberals)

A "colorblind" society (one where people are not pre-judged by their skin color) is something we should all strive for, not something to be mocked and derided. How on earth did things ever get so upside down?

The old generation had it right. The appeal should be to morality and reason, not collective guilt. Thinking such as represented in this OP will only lead to resentment, misunderstanding , and divisiveness.

[1StrongBlackMan]

130. How does one ...

appeal should be to morality and reason, when the "offender" refuses to acknowledge/recognize that they have "offended"?

[jack_krass]

135. What "offender"?

White liberals?

You mean the white liberals who just helped propel a black man to the most powerful office on earth?.

Im sorry but this line of thinking just seems more and more bizzare the longer I think about it. I just cant wrap my head around it. Probably because I've never been one to indulge in self guilt. I mean Christ, can we get some perspective here?

[1StrongBlackMan]

158. ...

You mean the white liberals who just helped propel a black man to the most powerful office on earth?.

No ... the white liberals making the statement and/or doing the thing that the person, presumably, but not always, the PoC, termed racist.

Im sorry but this line of thinking just seems more and more bizzare the longer I think about it. I just cant wrap my head around it.

Oh. I say.

I mean Christ, can we get some perspective here?

That is, exactly, what others are trying to provide.

[kwassa]

146. You have been out of the loop?

Are you a member of that older generation?

"Colorblind" has not been seen as an ideal for a very long time, for the simple reason that we all see color. The issue is not seeing color, but valuing all colors. The term "colorblind" has become somewhat offensive in that it advocates blindness, never a good idea.

As to guilt, no one advocated guilt, and this issue is not about guilt. It is about understanding, which I don't think you do yet, as you are refusing to consider the information in the article.

This article, which you really should read, talks about unconscious biases that create more subtly racist interactions, ones where liberal whites deny the life experience of black people as being true and real.

I can see them sprinkled all through this thread, and I honestly see your contribution as another example of that in your refusal to consider the arguments in the article, and instead start talking about guilt.

[jack_krass]

147. ...

I'm part of GenX. It was my parents generation that I was speaking of.

I did read through the entire article, and frankly, find the content too silly to even comment on. If I didn't know people actually thought this way, I'd say it was posted as a joke or hoax.

Very few of us in this life are not affected by microagressions, or microinvalidations, or microtransgressions, regardless of race. As aleays, the key is how we handle them.

Colorblind to me means I don't show bias against someone because they have a different skin tone than me. (sometimes we over-complicate these things )

[kwassa]

148. It is not silly to black people.

It is not silly to me.

The difference is not that we don't all get microinvalidations, the difference is that white people don't get microinvalidations simply because of their race. That is it in a nutshell.

Are you familiar with the theory of white privilege?

[jack_krass]

152. If your black, then ok point taken,

If you're white, then stop trying to speak for black people, dammit. It must be incredibly offensive to those reading it to see you speaking for them.

Either way, well have to agree to disagree on this one. I'm against racism, mass incarceratuon, cradle to prison pipeline, pro civil rights, pro afm action, etc etc, and I think the ideas in the article are idiotic (most commenters on huffpo, including several black ones agree with me). I don't think you can sat anything to make me think otherwise (you welcome to try)

[1StrongBlackMan]

160. Why would you have a problem with Kwassa saying ...

that when PoC don't have a problem with him saying it? (i.e., we agree with his assessment ... that he got from listen TO people of color)

I don't think you can sat anything to make me think otherwise (you welcome to try)

Well ... So much for &quot the) appeal should be to morality and reason", when you refuse to pause to hear what is being said.

[jack_krass]

162. He said:

'It's not silly to black people"

I just found it strange that he's speaking for all black people(especially seeing that I don't think he's black-sorry if I'm wrong). Clearly -some- black people find it silly (see comments in the article). I don't know if most do or dont, and im veering into uncomfortable territory here so I'll shut up on that front

when you refuse to pause to hear what is being said.

Again, I read the whole article. I really tried, but still found the whole thing just so ridiculous. It would gave carried more weight if a black guy wrote it -I felt the guy was classic whitesplaining.

[kwassa]

163. I wasn't going to respond, but ....

it seems you continue to misunderstand me.

I'm not speaking for black people. I know the opinions of black people, lots of them. I am white, now married for many years to a black woman, with lots of black people in my life everywhere. I also immerse myself in the issues.

To speak to this point in a very general way, your finding this whole thing ridiculous merely speaks, in my opinion, your lack of exposure to these issues in the first place. I don't expect you to understand this, as you can't know what you don't know.

[1StrongBlackMan]

159. +1 ...

Especially the:

I honestly see your contribution as another example of that in your refusal to consider the arguments in the article, and instead start talking about guilt.

Part.

[LoveIsNow]

133. I did number two the other day.

A friend got offended when I referred to him as Mexican-American, saying he preferred Mexican, even though he was born in Santa Fe.

I immediately made it about me being offended that he doesn't want to be American, rather than asking why.

I then did, and he told me that he is fine being called American or Mexican, but not Mexican-American, because he associates the term with Chicanismo, and he considers himself not Chicano, but a second-generation immigrant who happens to be from Mexico.

I will definitely try in the future to listen before making things about me.

[Nye Bevan]

136. Not the greatest subject line! (nt)

[LoveIsNow]

139. Point taken!

Sometimes I'm deaf to what's coming out of my mouth.

[1StrongBlackMan]

161. But take heart ...

when the #2 did come out your mouth, and someone draws your attention to it, you recognized it for what it was, and asked, "Why?"

That puts you light years ahead of many "liberals" on this board.

DUer Brer Cat put it perfectly, and you practiced it ...

I simply say: 'I wasn't aware my words or actions hurt you. Tell me more so I can learn

[Cha]

167. "I hear how my words or actions hurt you. Thank you for pointing that out to me." Brilliant!

Mahalo bravenak~

[bravenak]

168. Love you!!!

[Cha]

169. Love you, bravenak!!!

Respect



http://theobamadiary.com/2015/11/29/respect-7/

[bravenak]

171. Nice! Sad, though.

[Cha]

174. Very..

Sorry, it's OT.. I was just viewing this when I saw your OP.. and wanted you to see it.

It's an excellent article, brave.. Dr George Sachs has hit on some very important points that we've seen highlighted in action on this very board.

[bravenak]

175. It is so on point. Heck, we see the actions on this very thread!

It's ok to be off topic. I don't mind.

[Recursion]

182. Love this. Stop making racism "about" white people.

That's the step so many can't take.

[bravenak]

184. I know. This needs to be posted over and over.

Eventually it will trickle down.