|
RaceVClass 34 - 11 Apr 2012 - Main.MeaganBurrows
|
| | I realize this is going to be a pretty damn controversial post, but I feel compelled to speak on the subject. I sometimes become concerned that classism becomes too easily conflated with racism in our world.
There's many draws to calling a certain policy racist: | | | I agree with this statement, and perhaps a part of Kipp's original point. I don't think discussions of race overshadow discussions of class in a particularly nefarious way, but I do think the way we discuss race is important. "Us" vs "them" is counterproductive, because we should be talking about "us" vs "it," where "it" is the current power structure based on white supremacy, and "us" is anyone who is disturbed by that system (regardless of melanin levels).
-- MarcLegrand - 11 Apr 2012 | |
>
> | “The exercise of “othering”, no matter who is engaging in it, can be detrimental to the pursuit of social justice. If we have in mind a vision of the future that is truly post-racial—one in which a person would have to look at their hand to find out what race they are—then we should be skeptical of any attempt to reinforce racial boundaries.”
I think Toma’s post is spot on with regards to what is necessary in order to avoid repeating and reinforcing the psychological distinctions of ‘otherness’ that have been instilled in us by history and social interaction. I believe that we can recognize and acknowledge the existence of structural hierarchies that are objectively inherent in our society, while refraining from perpetuating socio-psychological factions and often fictitious and reductionist ‘us vs. them’ mentalities, that serve demean individual worth and contribution and to impede the cooperative and cohesive effort required to dismantle unequal systemic power dynamics.
I think this is where the distinction (for me anyways) between ‘white supremacy’ and ‘racism’, or ‘patriarchy’ and ‘misogyny’, or ‘kindness to the rich and justness to the poor’ and ‘classism’ is important. It is apparent that you can work to demolish rigid power dynamics by affirmatively creating and promoting more opportunities for individuals, passing protective legislation and social policy, and enforcing this legislation through the courts - as can be seen by the reduction in societal ‘patriarchy’ (by which I mean male dominance) through the rise of women promulgated by the feminist movement. However, even when descriptive, institutionalized power dynamics have been subject to upheaval by the legal system, law is a weak form of social control. It must compete with psychological rhetoric latent in the social fabric of human interaction – a much stronger force, which not only serves to bolster and support existing institutionalized legal inequalities but works on its own to maintain separation and inhibit mutual understanding.
While more women have made great strides gaining rights to equal opportunity in education, in the workforce and reproductive freedom, I would argue that misogyny, female objectification and socialized views of male/female power dynamics that disempower women are still alive and well. It is only when we actively work to acknowledge and restructure our conscious and unconscious social-psychic baggage that serves to ‘color’ of view of the motives/skill/contribution/validity/position of ‘the other’, that we truly begin to dismantle both ‘white supremacy’ AND ‘racism’ or ‘patriarchy’ AND ‘mysogyny’. We can enact as many ‘equal protection’ laws or push the court to make as many Brown or Roe decisions as we like, but if we do not consciously work in our day-to-day social interactions to refrain from “‘othering’ needlessly”, and to encourage others to follow suit, the power of social forces will inevitably eclipse and make hollow any ‘legal’ reform we achieve.
-- MeaganBurrows - 11 Apr 2012 |
|
|
RaceVClass 33 - 11 Apr 2012 - Main.MarcLegrand
|
| | I realize this is going to be a pretty damn controversial post, but I feel compelled to speak on the subject. I sometimes become concerned that classism becomes too easily conflated with racism in our world.
There's many draws to calling a certain policy racist: | | | Feel free to continue talking about it, but I'm just going to observe from here on out.
-- KippMueller - 11 Apr 2012 | |
>
> | "Still, I do think there are instances where race is still used as an 'us vs. them' tool that doesn't work to dismantle 'white supremacy,' but to further a feeling of 'otherness' for both/all parties." - Sanjay
I agree with this statement, and perhaps a part of Kipp's original point. I don't think discussions of race overshadow discussions of class in a particularly nefarious way, but I do think the way we discuss race is important. "Us" vs "them" is counterproductive, because we should be talking about "us" vs "it," where "it" is the current power structure based on white supremacy, and "us" is anyone who is disturbed by that system (regardless of melanin levels).
-- MarcLegrand - 11 Apr 2012 |
|
|
RaceVClass 32 - 11 Apr 2012 - Main.KippMueller
|
| | I realize this is going to be a pretty damn controversial post, but I feel compelled to speak on the subject. I sometimes become concerned that classism becomes too easily conflated with racism in our world.
There's many draws to calling a certain policy racist: | | | Rumbi, I think to some extent we're not talking about the same thing, and when we are we've just found that we disagree. | |
>
> | Sanjay, love the sum-up of my argument. That's exactly it. | | | Just wanted to thank everyone again for contributing. This was pretty damn awesome. I'm really glad we have people with different perspectives too. Learning perspectives makes life great. Anyone who wants to continue discussing it with me in person, a beer on the Kipper.
Feel free to continue talking about it, but I'm just going to observe from here on out. |
|
|
RaceVClass 31 - 11 Apr 2012 - Main.TomaLivshiz
|
| | I realize this is going to be a pretty damn controversial post, but I feel compelled to speak on the subject. I sometimes become concerned that classism becomes too easily conflated with racism in our world.
There's many draws to calling a certain policy racist: | | | The exercise of “othering”, no matter who is engaging in it, can be detrimental to the pursuit of social justice. If we have in mind a vision of the future that is truly post-racial—one in which a person would have to look at their hand to find out what race they are—then we should be skeptical of any attempt to reinforce racial boundaries. If we have in mind a vision of the future which is less classist—in which we are no less kind to the poor than we are to the rich—then we should, at the very least, be wary of alienating anyone who supports our cause. | |
<
< | This does not mean that we should avoid conversations about white privilege, about systemic discrimination, or about the all-too-strong correlation between race and class. We must talk about these things. We must DO about these things. But it is probably possible to engage with these questions without using acerbic language which exacerbates racial tensions and discourages candid conversations such as this one. | >
> | This does not mean that we should avoid conversations about white privilege, about systemic discrimination, or about the all-too-strong correlation between race and class. We must talk about these things. We must DO about these things. But it is probably possible to engage with these questions without using acerbic language which exacerbates racial tensions and discourages candid discussions such as this one (by this I am referring to the language used by the speaker in Kipp's original anecdote). I am thankful that, here on this thread, we are able to speak about this often taboo issue so frankly and respectfully. | | | -- TomaLivshiz - 11 Apr 2012 | | | -- RumbidzaiMaweni - 11 Apr 2012 | |
>
> | I feel that my original post, specifically my last sentence, may have been poorly written and thus confusing. I edited it to reflect my intended meaning.
-- TomaLivshiz - 11 Apr 2012 | | | I don't think we're all that far apart in perspective. Kipp can handle himself though (and I don't want to ascribe my thoughts to him), so from here on out, these are just my views.
I agree that race (like any other subject) should be on the table for discussion whenever it is relevant, and that others' personal feeling of discomfort should not limit expression. However, I think Toma's post highlights a valuable distinction in what expression is productive and what isn't. I don't agree that abstaining from engaging in "othering" is a lofty platitude with no practical value. Discussing race to further mutual understanding is important; using it as a bludgeon to promote adversarial conflict is wrong. I think Rumbi and I are sort of in agreement here. She can correct me if not, but she makes a point that Kipp may be confusing his "implicated identity" being pointed out as being "blamed" and made an adversary. I can't speak to his confusion much beyond what Kipp shared in his example, which is to say, not much. Still, I do think there are instances where race is still used as an "us vs. them" tool that doesn't work to dismantle "white supremacy," but to further a feeling of "otherness" for both/all parties. |
|
|
RaceVClass 30 - 11 Apr 2012 - Main.KippMueller
|
| | I realize this is going to be a pretty damn controversial post, but I feel compelled to speak on the subject. I sometimes become concerned that classism becomes too easily conflated with racism in our world.
There's many draws to calling a certain policy racist: | | | One final point as to implicated identities. I'm of the opinion (and this is a worldview that I don't necessarily believe is the only correct one) that race should never implicate negative identities to people. The concept that someone who devotes her life to ending racial/social/class-based strife is somehow a contributor to the problem solely because of the color of her skin is antithetic to my view of improving racial relations. She can no more change her race than I can. The post-racial world that Toma (and, to some extent, Eben) discusses requires one of two things - adding negative racial connotations to those who don't experience them or removing them from those that do. I'd prefer to live in the latter world.
-- SanjayMurti - 11 Apr 2012 | |
>
> | Rumbi, I think to some extent we're not talking about the same thing, and when we are we've just found that we disagree.
Just wanted to thank everyone again for contributing. This was pretty damn awesome. I'm really glad we have people with different perspectives too. Learning perspectives makes life great. Anyone who wants to continue discussing it with me in person, a beer on the Kipper.
Feel free to continue talking about it, but I'm just going to observe from here on out.
-- KippMueller - 11 Apr 2012 |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|