TRA friend and BLM

[maudavery]

I have a very woke friend, she has always been very outspoken on the trans issue but on social media she is surprisingly quiet at the minute, perhaps because JKR has made such brilliant points that it is difficult to argue against. So instead she has been posting a lot about BLM, trying to “educate” her white friends (she is white) about racism and recommend lots of reading. It is normal during this reading to feel defensive and uncomfortable she says. She invites us to DM her so that we can talk about these feelings. She doesn’t intend to sounds preachy and self righteous. She has then listed about 50 forms of covert white supremacy. Some of them I am aware of eg white hero complex, after the Stacey Dooley affair, (but then I wonder, is my friend not demonstrating this herself in her incessant drive to educate others about racism on behalf of people of a different race?)

I always thought not being racist was fairly straightforward- judge people by the content of the character, not the colour of their skin. But apparently this is no longer the case. I need to educate myself (I read very widely and have always read a lot of books by BAME authors, but she is recommending non fiction on the issue of race itself). I’m struggling with it to be honest. “White silence” is a covert act of white supremacy but then because there are seemingly an infinite amount of ways I can be covertly racist, no wonder people are silent because there are so many Microaggressions and covert forms of racism that to say anything at all is risky. (Eg it is racist to tell a black person they are “articulate”) But silence is violence. I just think the whole thing is authoritarian and intolerant the same way that “transwomen are women” is. And if I were to come out as GC on social media, which I have not been brave enough to do yet, then she would dismiss me as a terf and ergo because I don’t sign up to the package deal of the extreme left, I’m probably racist too.

For the record, I work at an outstanding inner city school with a high amount of BAME students. Day in and day out For the last 5 years I have built up relationships with kids of all backgrounds and led my department so that the students achieve excellent academic outcomes. I have diversified the curriculum, but I have also tried to change the curriculum to ensure it is academically challenging and gives our students the “cultural capital” that their more advantaged peers take for granted. I think this is a more meaningful demonstration of my own antiracism than posting a black square on my Instagram, but the former is me being a “white saviour” while the latter is “violence” through silence.

I think black lives matter, I understand why “all lives matter” is wrong, but at the same time, BLM as a political movement is something I cannot support - it’s aims are the end of the nuclear family, the defunding of the police and the overthrowing of capitalism. I also think the conflation of race with certain political beliefs is problematic in itself - a point Priti Patel made well I thought the other day - (although I am not a fan of hers AT ALL) but she seems to have shut down for not being the right kind of race or not having had the right experienced racism - which is surely racist in itself? I was horrified and sickened by the murder of George Floyd. I do not feel personally responsibility or guilt for it though which apparently makes me a racist monster.

I’m wondering if i should engage in a dialogue with my friend about this as she has invited this but wonder if it wouldn’t end well.

I think black lives matter, I understand why “all lives matter” is wrong, but at the same time, BLM as a political movement is something I cannot support - it’s aims are the end of the nuclear family, the defunding of the police and the overthrowing of capitalism.

Also, I think it's unfair to say this. That's what a group calling themselves have decided they want to do. If you lived in America you'd know that black people aren't out to destroy the nuclear family in any capacity. 8 out of ten black Americans are Christian. It's a hashtag that encompasses pain of black people who live with fear of violence from the police.

I think this article from Trevor Phillips is good in explaining what this is about

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/culture-warriors-want-control-not-equality-56knrgklh
Culture warriors want control, not equality
Whether it’s on race or gender, the extremists in our midst want to stop freedom of speech

The heart of liberalism is about finding a balance between opposing views and things working because the balance between the extremes isn't tolerated by public consensus. This requires full inclusiveness and representation. It stops people from missing their 'political blindspots' by allowing free speech. Liberalism is supposed to protect the weakest in its society this way.

Where it has failed is in its ability to identify those most in need of that protection - particularly BAME needs and the issue of poverty.

This is because the 'liberal consensus' has been hijacked by middle class privilege so it has become unrepresentative of wider concerns within society. This is primarily within the media and within government but extends to other controlling organisations and is why regulatory capture occurs.

The post war settlement which established modern day liberalism really started to collapse in around 2008 and the financial crisis) but has its roots further back than that. The 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s were a time of social mobility where there were opportunities to move up the ladder and to not be restricted by the accident of your birth.

What started to happen after this was a reduction in things like apprenticeships and investment in people in the same way. If you didn't have an education you couldn't progress in the same way. Experience on the job became less valued. This closed many doors to people and instead you had an increasing number of already affluent middle classes dominating and returning us to a society which is structured more like pre-world wars in terms. This process accelerated post 2008 and it also created a generation of younger people who felt both very excluded because of their privileged educated and because even though they had it, they couldn't do anything with it as there is a lack of opportunities. They lack purpose. They were above menial jobs and had no idea if experience of life and yet their were few opportunities in the middle management / establishment they had been trained to replace their parents and grandparents in. Meanwhile you have an invisible layer of society below that which isn't getting listened to and is disconnected to the lives of the middle class do gooders trying to find a space in society.

Enter the young woke. A class if younger people determined to right the wrongs of their parents generations without much of a clue of what those failings are because of a lack of life experience. There is a new to find causes to celebrate and champion but little understanding of the underlying issues. Instead it's driven by consumers idealism and crowd identity. Hello identity politics.

Those with genuine grievances become indisguishable from those who are hijacking this need for purpose. And these middle class young are struggling to identify legitimate ones from those piggybacking onto those with a cause because of their lack of understanding of the world and their privilege.

Our 'do-gooders' end resembling victorian moral guardians with a hugely authoritarian streak of puritanical ideals which must not be discussed or debated. That's a far cry from the post war situation where those who have fought in the trenches in WW1 and WW2 who had more basic demands of access to health care. Other modern victorian are all about 'keeping up appearances' rather than the lived experiences.

The virtue signaling isnt to the black community (or which other cause it is) its to 'other people like me' to prove worth and status as evangelicals trying to establish a new world order. That's about maintaining positions of power within the middle class at a time its shrinking and its inherited wealth rather than earned opportunity are now dominating.

There are white middle class people who definitely do support BLM but there are also many who are using it as an opportunity for self preservation and advancement of their own position and lack any real true understanding of the problem because its routed in socioeconomic barriers created by the middle class dominance.

This is where the parallels of middle class transallies fit in.

It's all about economics and a shift from opportunity of the masses to a society once again controlled by an elite and a smaller middle class where conformity and appearances dominate over reason, talent, ability and hard work.

And that's the story of how liberalism lost its way and authoritarianism took over again.

@FishAreAcquaintancesNotFood

But that is what I mean, BLM has a particular political agenda which is not shared by all black people.

@Chiochan Thank you so much for the link Coleman Hughes, I shall be hunting down a lot more of his work.

@BovaryX That critique makes a lot of sense. I did wonder a bit while reading it but it gets such a lot of status in the media I thought I must be wrong....maybe not!

Your friend is right that there are covert forms of racism. It's not as black and white and either being actively racist or not at all. That's absolutely correct of her. She does sound like she is, god I hate this phrase, but virtue signalling a little bit. But on the other hand, a lot of those covertly racist things have come forward in the wake of the protests e.g. all lives matter.

My very first political demonstration was against the National Front when I was still at school and so I used to think that I couldn't possibly be racist. Now I realise that I couldn't possibly not be racist because I'm white and live in a world that is structurally underpinned by racism.

Here's the half hour of You Tube that may change your ideas as much as it changed mine. I read the book afterwards. It's Robin DiAngelo introducing us to the idea of white fragility

It's not comfortable viewing for liberal white people who are sure they're not racist but you may, like me, end up with a kind of lightbulb moment.

BLM is not a gastag it's a political movement, a very far left political movement. The concept that black lives matter is unquestionably tue the political movement to defund the police, change the way our democracy works and overthrow capitalism not so much

@Shedbuilder yes I have seen that. But on this thread there is a poster who has said that reading DiAngelo had destabilised her 30 yr marriage to her black DH. How can that be a force for good?

How can encouraging people to feel guilt and shame over actions which are not their personal responsibility ever be healthy? It's akin to religious dogmatism and the concept of original sin.

Just ignore it. Anyone who thinks there is one "correct" view on race and racism is an idiot. My partner is BAME and even just within his family there is a massive diversity of opinion on all these issues.

I'm very keen that we have more of a discussion about racism, we desperately need that. But we need far less of the lecturing and righteousness. If you want to have a pop at your friend then ask why she thinks she speaks on behalf of all black people. But if it were me I'd just hit the mute button.

I managed to miss that — read the first few posts and responded.

I don't know how you deal with that. It must be a nightmare. On another thread (I know cross-threading isn't encouraged) I'm under fire from some Irish women because a few of them see in me, an English woman, all the pain of 500 years of Irish oppression and suffering. I struggle with it: my family were subsistence farmers and peasants in Scotland and Scandinavia with no agency of their own. It's not fair, it leaves me feeling guilty and shamed for events. totally beyond my control but it's how it is.

For me DiAngelo's book was a relief because her analysis of the structure took some, by no means all, the responsibility from me personally by pointing out that our society is built on racism.

Would she, would you, like to shove race back under the carpet and pretend to forget about it for the sake of her marriage and those of others?

No answers. Sorry.

Forgot to say Maudavery, listen to DiAngelo. It's almost certainly not what you think it is. In fact you may well be feeling pre-emptive guilt and defensiveness yourself. Not saying you are, but no one likes to be confronted on difficult subjects.

How can encouraging people to feel guilt and shame over actions which are not their personal responsibility ever be healthy? It's akin to religious dogmatism and the concept of original sin

Absolutely. Isn't Robin DiAngelo part of the intolerant "liberal" at Evergreen College?

I'm also so tired of the narcissism involved in this public atonement and "educating myself" and posting on social media. If you care about black lives, if you care about racism then bloody do something about it. Donate to an organisation, volunteer, start something yourself, write to your MP. The black single mother who has just lost her job and can't afford to feed her kids gains absolutely nothing from white people lecturing each other on social media. It's pathetic.

Would she, would you, like to shove race back under the carpet and pretend to forget about it for the sake of her marriage and those of others?

I'm not suggesting that all all. I don't think it's an either/or - atone for the sins of historical racism through internalised guilt and shame, vs "shove race back under the carpet". Surely there must be a middle way.

Thanks for the good work you are doing in schools giving kids access to the cultural capital that matters if they want to advance in the real
world. It's all very well "decolonising" the curriculum, but kids need to be able to move smoothly in all kinds of environments Expecting the world to operate the way you would like and believing you have a right to be "authentic" in every situation is exceedingly childish and a set-up for failure and persistent unhappiness

Anyway, to address your question, I really wouldn't approach her with my own opinions. I would just ask her probing questions that allow her to verbalise the contradictions and hypocrisy and stupidity of her own arguments. I find that much more effective than holding actual discussions with the self-righteous and verbose SJWs.

but it gets such a lot of status in the media

Roughseas

Imagine diagnosing a condition which afflicts 100 percent of your target audience; white American liberals; then helpfully offering the 'cure.' For $10,000 you can attend a seminar where the author will cleanse you of this sin. The only thing this is helping is its author's bank balance.

DeAngelo's sctick seems to be that because white people feel offended by being called racist this means they are racist. Its important to note that only someone who is not racist would be offended by being called a racist, and actual racist does not mind being called a racist.
De Angelo is an old fashioned charlatan, like Judith Bulter she makes money playing on the fears of the gullible.

De Angelo is an old fashioned charlatan, like Judith Bulter she makes money playing on the fears of the gullible

Exactly

For me DiAngelo's book was a relief because her analysis of the structure took some, by no means all, the responsibility from me personally by pointing out that our society is built on racism

I think her book has guilt tripped you into taking responsibility for something which isn't your fault.

And I think you're off-kilter on that and almost certainly haven't seen what she's actually saying — that most human societies are structured on racism and that changing structures, rather than just tinkering around the edges with endless equality campaigns we need structural change.

30 minutes of your life. Try it. What might be so terrible about seeing something from a different perspective?

Imagine diagnosing a condition which afflicts 100 percent of your target audience; white American liberals; then helpfully offering the 'cure.' For $10,000 you can attend a seminar where the author will cleanse you of this sin. The only thing this is helping is its author's bank balance.

Indeed BovaryX

As with the debate around gender identity, there appears to be only one permissible way to look at the issue and that's through the lens of Critical Race Theory which is what is now pushed by much of the left leaning media, including the BBC.

Although I don't agree with him on everything and like many men he seems to have a blindspot when it comes to women and feminism, I think James Lindsay is very interesting on CRT and Critical Social Justice in general.

The idea thay most human societies are structured on racism is patently abserd.
Most human societies throughout human existance have been made up of one race. Is she seriouly saying Africal or European societies back in mediveal times were based on race? over social class?
Its nonesense.

What about the society that numerically most humans currently live in, China. Or India with the cast system going back centuries.
Their societies are primarily based on race?

There may be some merit in the argument that most human societies have been influenced by tribalism. And yes, there are some scholars who argue that racism also existed in the middle ages (based on e.g. Jews as 'racial others'). You can argue that the Indian caste system is also a form of racism because it does incorporate skin colour to some extent.

But that just leaves you with a general sense that humans are prone to in-group/out-group thinking based on external and cultural features, and how this works in a particular context is very complicated.

For what it's worth, I tend to agree that Robin Di Angelo is a charlatan.

This is only a fledgling thought of mine so it is not robust. Just a little flutter.

I am starting to think that there's a spilling over of academic analysis into personal and practical discussion that is generally unhelpful... so "privilege" as a word and "white privilege" as a concept in academic discussion and policy determination is valid as worthwhile discussing. But in general discourse with a white person who feels they are working hard just to make ends meet with bad pay and conditions etc etc etc... perhaps talking to them personally about their white privilege isn't so helpful? Just makes the hackles rise and fails to advance the cause. I mean you could certainly discuss with them things like "do you think you would have got away with X behaviour if you were black?" And things like that. Bit throwing the word privilege around in non-academic discussion seems to be unhelpful.

However. I also get the argument about not wanting to have to discuss race in a way that panders to white people needing to feel comfortable so that may derail my fledgling thought. But the white privilege example is just an easy example. I think the main crux of the thought is that academic and general discussion are very different in their style and their rigour and bringing academic words and concepts into general discussion is potentially unhelpful.

Like trying to teach year 8 the full complexity of respiration vs teaching them the equation that gives the general gist of it...

I'm not sure about this thought in a lot if ways.

But in the interests of honest discourse I will post this anyway...