Whiteness, NSA Spying and the Irony of Racial Privilege

[jaysunb]

Crossposting from AA Group

Tim Wise

It’s not that I’m not angry.

It’s not that I’m not disturbed, even horrified by the fact that my government thinks it appropriate to spy on people, monitoring their phone calls — to whom we speak and when — among other tactics, all in the supposed service of the national interest.

That any government thinks it legitimate to so closely monitor its people is indicative of the inherent sickness of nation-states, made worse in the modern era, where the power to intrude into the most private aspects of our lives is more possible than ever, thanks to the data-gathering techniques made feasible by technological advance.

That said, I also must admit to a certain nonchalance in the face of the recent revelations about the National Security Agency’s snooping into phone records, and the dust-up over the leaking of the NSA’s program by Ed Snowden. And as I tried to figure out why I wasn’t more animated upon hearing the revelations — and, likewise, why so many others were — it struck me. Those who are especially chapped about the program, about the very concept of their government keeping tabs on them — in effect profiling them as potential criminals, as terrorists — are almost entirely those for whom shit like this is new: people who have never before been presumed criminal, up to no good, or worthy of suspicion.
In short, they are mostly white. And male. And middle-class or above. And most assuredly not Muslim.

http://www.timwise.org/2013/06/whiteness-nsa-spying-and-the-irony-of-racial-privilege/#more-2984

[JI7]

1. always great to hear from Tim Wise

[Liberal_in_LA]

2. ny's stop and frisk comes to mind. many have no problem with it

Because they aren't in the group being slammed up against the wall and frisked

[Whisp]

22. yes. The whole point is that.

Fantastic article.

[gollygee]

25. +1

The NSA stuff is intrusive, but stop and frisk is much more intrusive, and people haven't been so upset about that.

[uponit7771]

3. +1, few were screaming this loud and long when it was known Muslims were under...

...surveillance

[JI7]

5. the outrage is that it isn't "just them"

[Fumesucker]

6. DU was anti surveillance before anti surveillance was cool

Considerably more so before Obama's election than after even.

[sabrina 1]

13. Yes, in fact many were supporting it. But we WERE screaming about it. Glenn Greenwald was

screaming about it. He was targeted by one of our Private Contractors for a smear campaign due to his constant 'whinging' about these policies.

Others who were screaming about it were targeted with big money to run them out of office, good progressive Dems, like Russ Feingold, eg.

And we're still screaming about it, in fact we elected Democrats in order to try to stop it.

But that doesn't seem to be working either.

So, is it too far gone and we all should just relax and learn to live in a surveillance state? That seems to be the message now, coming even from some Democrats?

[uponit7771]

28. Muslim survelence ?! I doubt it went past 2 hours worth of DU posting

[sabrina 1]

29. The world doesn't consist of what happens on DU. Or maybe it does, for some.

But even here there was plenty of outrage over the surveillance of Muslims but we were told it was all the fault of Republicans. Unless you forgot the Mosque in NYC 'controversy', which thanks to the millions of Dems who supported them, did go forward.

And that is just one. Many Democrats were out there in the streets countering the bought and paid for 'faux protesters' led by the racist Pamela Geller.

Now that is a racist for you! Apparently DUers are all Pamela Geller now. Frankly considering the sources of these attacks to try to silence people, which will not work anyhow, I hope to be included in them.

[uponit7771]

30. Yes there was outrage, for about an hour or 2....no doubt people didn't like it btu didn't spend

...2 weeks postign about it either

[leftstreet]

4. DURec

[sibelian]

7. My God...

[Skip Intro]

8. Those who are especially chapped are white males?

Why do some people insist on making everything about race. This isn't about race.

Casting white males as only outraged, or chapped, by the NSA (and other) revelations because they don't give a fuck until it hits them is kinda bullshit.

This has nothing to do with privilege.

This has to do with the basic core principles of our nation.

Why drag race into it?

To distill and muddy the focus on the facts, maybe....?

[Puzzledtraveller]

14. It is a last resort deflection

It used to work like a charm, it's being worn out now as evidenced on DU.

[DonCoquixote]

9. a quote that rings true

"And then maybe, just maybe, consider how privilege — being on the upside, most of the time, of systems of inequality — can (and has) let you down, even set you up for a fall. How maybe, just maybe, all the apoplexy mustered up over the NSAs latest outrage, might have been conjured a long time ago, and over far greater outrages, the burdens of which were borne by only certain persons, and not others.

And yes, I know full well that some were speaking out, loudly and clearly from the start and have never stopped. I am not speaking to them (to you?), so relax (after all, if what I’m saying doesn’t apply to you, why so defensive, buttercup?) But so too, there are those who know (perhaps you?) if they are among those who, like Rand Paul or Glenn Beck or — for that matter — Edward Snowden had never before raised too much fuss about those other things, until it began to potentially affect them and people like them."

Of course,now that Hillary is the anointed one, there are a lot of people that are trying to cover up the fact they were racist in 2008.

[redqueen]

11. "after all, if what I’m saying doesn’t apply to you, why so defensive, buttercup?"

I've been wondering about that a lot lately. Even more than usual.

Exellent post.

[sabrina 1]

15. Excellent post. And then there are the others who were speaking out about it when Bush

was president and are now 'wildly defending it'.


And this is how it progresses.

[Whisp]

24. I wouldn't go so far as to say the Clintons are racist.

but they sure know the right buttons to push to activate the racists.

and I don't think they think that is wrong, it's just the 'game' to them. Anything to win.

[grantcart]

10. yep

[redqueen]

12. K&R.

To me this goes beyond criticism of the president.

Clinton and gore both have done equally horrific shit. And they have been trahsed (though from my perspective not nearly as harshly)... but more than that, those who still like and respect them despite their failings have not been demonized the way many DUers are demonizing people who still like and respect Obama despite his.

Shitbags
BOrG
Worshipper zombies
etc.

And now that a few people have opined that racism... ISM... has played a part in these different reactions... Now er have howls of outrage at "being called a racist".

The posturing... To me, it speaks volumes. Loudly.

[sabrina 1]

16. Lots of posturing going on. If you have always spoken out against these abuses and still are,

no amount of name-calling is going to stop you. But if you are among those who spoke out against them when Bush was president and now defend it, then you are posturing and a huge part of the reason why we got to where we are.

[bemildred]

17. Yes, totally, that says it, thank you. nt

[MNBrewer]

18. This just in. People of Color don't care about the NSA and what it does

??

That's the take home message of this article.

[redqueen]

19. Only as much as 'they're calling me racist!' is a take home message

of any post suggesting that the different treatment Obama and those who still like and respect him despite ldisagreeing with things he's done could be in any way influenced by racism.

[MNBrewer]

23. I don't treat Obama any differently over his Surveillance State than I did Bush

Are some of his critics motivated by racism? Yes.

But to smear all of his critics with that brush is counterproductive.

[redqueen]

26. Comparing the way he is treated by dems to the way Bush is treated by dems is not a fair comparison.

That's why I specified Clinton and Gore.

[MNBrewer]

27. I don't think he IS being treated differently by Dems

Gore was never President, and I withheld my vote from Clinton in his re-election for having signed DOMA.

Obama is being treated by Democrats exactly like every other Democratic president has been treated by Democrats.

[Whisp]

20. Wise.

'''Problem is, we are not a free people and never have been, and therein lies the rub.

The idea that with this NSA program there has been some unique blow struck against democracy, and that now our liberties are in jeopardy is the kind of thing one can only believe if one has had the luxury of thinking they were living in such a place, and were in possession of such shiny baubles to begin with. And this is, to be sure, a luxury enjoyed by painfully few folks of color, Muslims in a post-9/11 America, or poor people of any color. For the first, they have long known that their freedom was directly constrained by racial discrimination, in housing, the justice system and the job market; for the second, profiling and suspicion have circumscribed the boundaries of their liberties unceasingly for the past twelve years; and for the latter, freedom and democracy have been mostly an illusion, limited by economic privation in a class system that affords less opportunity for mobility than fifty years ago, and less than most other nations with which we like to compare ourselves.'''

[Solly Mack]

21. K&R

Let’s be clear, it’s not that the NSA misdeeds, carried out by the last two administrations, are no big deal. They’re completely indefensible, no matter the efforts of the apologists for empire — from the corporate media to President Obama to Dick Cheney — to legitimize them. A free people should not stand for it.

Problem is, we are not a free people and never have been, and therein lies the rub.

The idea that with this NSA program there has been some unique blow struck against democracy, and that now our liberties are in jeopardy is the kind of thing one can only believe if one has had the luxury of thinking they were living in such a place, and were in possession of such shiny baubles to begin with. And this is, to be sure, a luxury enjoyed by painfully few folks of color, Muslims in a post-9/11 America, or poor people of any color. For the first, they have long known that their freedom was directly constrained by racial discrimination, in housing, the justice system and the job market; for the second, profiling and suspicion have circumscribed the boundaries of their liberties unceasingly for the past twelve years; and for the latter, freedom and democracy have been mostly an illusion, limited by economic privation in a class system that affords less opportunity for mobility than fifty years ago, and less than most other nations with which we like to compare ourselves.

In short, when people proclaim a desire to “take back our democracy” from the national security apparatus, or for that matter the plutocrats who have ostensibly hijacked it, they begin from a premise that is entirely untenable; namely, that there was ever a democracy to take back, and that the hijacking of said utopia has been a recent phenomenon. But there wasn’t and it hasn’t been.


Reaction to the most recent confirmation of this truth ranks right along with the way so many were stunned by the September 11 attacks. The shock in that instance also came from a place of naiveté, wrought by the luxury of believing that the rest of the world viewed us as we did: as a paragon of virtue, which had brought only light and happiness to the world, rather than military occupations, hellfire missiles, brutal and crippling economic sanctions, and support for dictators so long as they were serving our presumed interests. But some people — and again, they were mostly black and brown — were not stunned at all.
Having long had no choice but to see the nation’s warts for what they were, and having never possessed the benefit of viewing America as most whites had, peoples of color, while horrified by that day’s events, were hardly likely to be knocked off stride by them. They had always known what it was like to be hated. And hunted. And solely because of who they were.

[FrodosPet]

31. OK, so I am jaded, and perhaps a bit paranoid

Since the 1980s I have been saying that I would be more surprised to learn that the government was NOT monitoring me than to learn it was.

I'm not saying I like it, or agree with it. I just figured it was a holdover from the fact that I had a security clearance in the Navy, and have had an outspoken step-father and friends, etc.

When one of your memories as a 7 year old is having a cop's gun pointed at your face, you get at least a bit paranoid and cynical.