Heh.

I needed that.

I’m someone who is trying to shed a lot of racist mental baggage. Part of that involves consciously taking into account the ethnicity of a non-white person when dealing with him/her in order to know that my own prejudices are there and hopefully short-circuit them. Taking account of someone’s ethnicity so as to avoid treating them as a manifestation of the color of their skin strikes me as treating someone as an individual.

Sounds like a reasonable strategy to me.

For what it’s worth, I don’t know if I ever “shed” mental baggage. At best, I develop greater facility at recognizing and coping with it. I have a subconscious, visceral reaction; I make the reaction conscious; I manage it. Kinda like scooping up a baseball in my glove, transferring the ball to my throwing arm and throwing it: I don’t expect that I will ever be able to skip a step, but with practice I can make the process more fluid.

I’m someone who is trying to shed a lot of racist mental baggage. Part of that involves consciously taking into account the ethnicity of a non-white person when dealing with him/her in order to know that my own prejudices are there and hopefully short-circuit them. Taking account of someone’s ethnicity so as to avoid treating them as a manifestation of the color of their skin strikes me as treating someone as an individual.

Mandolin is a moderator here; she told you what you needed to do to stay. You refused to do it. Therefore, you’re banned. Please don’t attempt to post comments on this blog any longer.

Nonserviam,

Your comment toward Eva is bizarre and condescending, not to mention the logical problems with insinuating that people of color are about to put all white people in death camps (and, further, your insinuation she would approve of this).

I am not insinuating anything, Mandolin. I’m simply taking the kuddly Kamau Kambon at his word.

Condescension is the least harsh response that Eva’s revelling in collective guilt — “guilty of racism by virtue of being white” — merits.

The Germans and Italians were at war with us, too. The Chinese, Koreans, Vietnamese, and other immigrants from countries around Japan were not at war with us. However, people of German and Italian ancestry were NOT interred, while people of Chinese and Vietnamese ancestry WERE.

You said at the beginning of that paragraph that fairness is important. Why is it that fairness is only important when the person in question is white? Or do you consider it fair for a third generation Chinese immigrant to be thrown into an internment camp because people are afraid of the Japanese?

Your comment toward Eva is bizarre and condescending, not to mention the logical problems with insinuating that people of color are about to put all white people in death camps (and, further, your insinuation she would approve of this).

Please apologize to her in your next comment.

And you really, truly have no idea what Ms. White can do? Perhaps Ms. White can stop giving her money to the racist shopkeeper and tell the shopkeeper why, for example. You seem to be investing an awful lot of energy in jumping up and down and shrieking NOT MY FAULT!!!1!! rather than recognizing that a) there is a problem and b) it doesn’t have to be your fault for you to be able to help solve it.

I mean, if you believe, and write, that a lot of people say “I cannot be a racist because I’m…” then that’s one thing.

But if you knew that people usually say “I am not a racist because…” and you wrote “…cannot be…” intending to exaggerate, then that’s different.

And if you responded (or prompted others to respond) to folks who didn’t like “cannot be” in a way that conflated their protests with racism, even if you personally considered your original statements to be exaggeration, then that’s dishonest.

I don’t know the degree to which that happened, though your recent response makes me more curious.

When I first read the cartoon, I thought quite a bit of the “lies” were exaggerated mischaracterizations. That’s just the “way” of editorial cartoons from both sides. I agree with many (not all) of the underlying points, but it seemed inaccurate on many fronts.

Since the thread is dying and less likely to derail at this point…

#10: Certainly happens. however, in the context it comes up, it is less often “…has nothing to do with us” and more often “…has less to do with me than (the other person) is implying.” I note Eva’s comment at #80, I may not be responsible for institutional racism that was created before I was born, but… and this seems correct. If someone tells me that my family’s be been benefiting from slavery for centuries, it isn’t true. Does that fact change my OTHER obligations w/r/t privilege, racism, etc? No. But it’s still not true.

#9: You left out the rest of the sentence as it is commonly used and/or implied: “…solely on account of their race.” Illegal immigrants, for example, are judged on their ACTIONS (immigrating illegally,) not on their race. Arabs are often judged solely on their race, though this isn’t accepted and is properly regarded as racism. Plenty of groups are insulted based on race though it isn’t “acceptable;” plenty of groups are insulted in an acceptable fashion based on non-race. Can you list another race than whites which it is “ok” to insult based on race?

#8 No exaggeration here, IMO.

#7 It usually comes up as “…so I’m NOT racist,” not “…so I CAN’T BE racist.” I’ve got no debate that those things listed don’t prove one is a non-racist. Do you mean to imply that they’re irrelevant to being non-racist, or insufficient to demonstrate someone is non-racist?

#6 Well, we should be talking about it. Which IMO requires, at the most, one sentence: “Yes, it exists in rare instances; no, it’s not functionally relevant; no, it’s not even vaguely as much of a problem as racism against POC; and please, can we get back on topic now?” Mostly, it’s useful to know where your conversational partners stand. Intellectually speaking, who wants to even talk with someone that can’t understand the absolutely minimal aspects of your argument?

You can’t have a real discussion about the merits or morality of the draft with someone who refuses to admit there is a single con to anyone, including draftees. You can’t have a real discussion about the merits or morality of abortion choice with someone who refuses to admit that there is a single instance when an abortion would ever possibly be beneficial. And you can’t have a real discussion about race with someone who can only see one side of the pros or cons of any particular question.

#5: I know this happens; i agree with the cartoon. Though I think it’s about an even split in practice. Some folks argue that consciousness is everything–no intent, no guilt. Some folks argue that consciousness is IRRELEVANT–actions alone dictate racism. I think that arguing for consciousness to be relevant is quite different from arguing for it to be solely controlling

#4: Well, sure, it IS often unfair. Try “disproving” racism, sometime (good luck, see #7…) There are many non-racist reasons to be against immigration, and many more to be against illegal immigration. FAR too many pro-illegal-immigration people use the “racist!” attack when it’s not justified. It’s too big a deal to be assumed at the outset.

#3-1: I like these and they don’t seem exaggerated at all.

Why is establishing the innocence of Mr. White your focus, rather than the inconvenience and discrimination experienced by people of color?

Its important because fairness is important. Because its important for people to be accountable for their own decisions (good or bad) and no one elses. As we have been reminded so often since 9/11 not all Muslims are fanatical terrorists, though some argue that profiling all of them is unfortunate but necessary. The Japanese that were interred in the US were not at war with us, though some have argued it served the greater good.

Amp

White people frequently talk about racism this way; as if the important thing isn’t that some classes of people are persistently discriminated against in a myriad of ways, but instead establishing the purity of white people’s motives.

I don’t give a crap about if Mr. White is a racist or not. Seriously, it doesn’t matter to me at all. I give a crap about if Mr. White is systematically given unfair advantages, and everyone else unfair disadvantages, because of the color of their skin. And if so, then it’s important to try and change how society functions — not because I think Mr. White is bad and needs to be punished, but because the system as a whole is unjust.

I wasn’t talking about “white people” I was discussing one person who happens to be white. OK, you don’t give a crap about Mr. White as an individual person, I understand that. But you don’t even seem to see Mr. White as an individual at all. His worth to you as a human being seems to lie solely in what ever groups be belongs to and how they fit into your political philosophy. Fair enough, to each’s own. I happen to think that’s wrong.

“if Mr. White is systematically given unfair advantages”

Was given by whom? Society, the system, etc, is just a collection of individuals making individual decisions. Each accountable for their own.

Nobody.Really I read your reply. It was interesting. I will think about it more before replying.

“Jewish Lies” (the only reason people criticize Israel is because they’re anti-semitic)

There’s a very simple (a caveman could do it) way to avoid being accused of antisemitism while criticizing Israel: to critisize Israel WITHOUT being antisemitic.

I do believe whites, whether we want to admit it or not, are all racist.

Eva, maideleh, worry no more. The delightful Dr. Kamau Kambon has come with a comprehensive — FINAL — solution to this pressing problem.