A White Man's Musings on A Black Woman's Musings

As someone who has diaried on race before I took great interest in these two recent diaries.   Coffee with my Dad and A Black Woman's Musings on Coffee with My Dad.  I thought they both provided valuable insight into thoughts on race in America from two incredibly different persepectives.  And it led to some musings.

First a little background on how I identify with Barack Obama.  After Obama won his race for Senate, I read Dreams From My Father.  I had begun to get into some community politics on a local level and the book fascinated me.   I recommended it to all the organizers I knew.   I also strongly identified with Barack in several ways.  While I'm ten years younger we shared a lot in common.  I moved around a lot as a kid and never really fit in in schools.  Like Barack, I found solace on the basketball court.  I then headed to college and like Barack, partied a bit too hard as I was trying to figure out who I was and had no clue.  However, I made it through an Ivy League school (like Barack) but I had no idea what I wanted to do.  I ended up in corporate America and was told I had a bright future there.  Like Barack, I didn't last long and chose a different path.  Unlike him I didn't have the balls to go try to organize poor people in poor neighborhoods.  I started my own business.  However, I honestly felt that here was a guy I had a lot in common with on many levels.  Now I'm sure many would say that as a white man I may have shared some general experiences with Barack but that all of that is insignificant to the fact that he was a black man in America.   You'll get no argument from me on that one.



There were some things in the Musings diary that struck me that I wanted to comment on, mainly the ideas in this quote.

What I see happening instead, as reflected in this diary and many conversations I have observed and read, is white people, left and right wing, subconsciously unifying in an effort to fulfill one of their deepest (yet rarely acknowledged and usually vehemently denied) desires since the 1960's:  the desire to once and for all free themselves of any guilt for, and any sense of personal obligation to fix, the damage wrought on African-Americans from hundreds of years of American white supremacy and all its institutionalized racism in the present generation.

I can't speak for all the whites in the country or what they subconsciously are doing but this statement came across to me as just plain wrong.  On several levels.  

1.  If you think one of the "deepest desires" of whites is to free themselves of guilt over slavery and racism in America, I think you are making a grave miscalculation on two levels.  One, I don't think most white americans give a damn on this subject.  I've never met one who says anything on the subject.   Two, I've thought about this a lot and I can assure you that I don't have one shred of guilt about slavery and racism in America.  I don't feel the need to be freed of something that for me doesn't exist.  I don't feel guilty about the destruction of native americans either.   I think all of these things are horrible events in history (like so many others) but I don't walk around bearing that burden.  Why?  I didn't do it and I'm not taking responsibility for every bad thing ever done by people who happen to look like me.  And I'm surely not going to base decisions in my life on trying to make up for the misdeeds of people I have nothing to do with.

2.  This is second part I had a problem with

The desire to once and for all free themselves of any sense of personal obligation to fix the damage wrought on African-Americans from hundreds of years of American white supremacy and all its institutionalized racism in the present generation.

I'll return to my first point and criticism.  I don't think anyone is voting for Obama so they don't feel like they have to work to help make the lives of black americans better.  If they aren't doing that type of work now, it ain't like they are going to start just because Obama isn't elected.   And if they are doing it, its not like they are going to stop.  In my city the white liberals are the ones doing the most to help the poor communities (mostly black population).   Perhaps they do it out of guilt but I doubt it.  And the sad truth is, if they didn't do it, no one else would.  

•  You're right.

  At least factually.  But you're speaking in a virtually foriegn language to the person who wrote the words you are complaining about.  And that is the "problem."    

  by recontext on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:09:08 AM PDT

  •  I agree

    that there seems to be a large disconnect, as should be expected.  

    I'm not complaining about the words.  Just saying that I think the premise is incorrect and if we want to try to solve some of these issues we need to understand what motivates people.  My assertion is that white guilt is a very rare commodity.

    by onemadson on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:19:06 AM PDT

    •  My sense is that there is such a thing

      as white guilt.  Maybe I'm running with a different crowd than you are; I don't know.  Also, it's not a topic that people are comfortable discussing, although I've had discussions with very close friends about that very topic.

      I do not myself feel guilty for what white people did in the past, yet most Americans understand that there is still a lack of equality of opportunity. It's not simply about black Americans, because as a woman I have felt that lack of equal opportunity strongly, yet because blacks were once slaves in this very country, it's an extra ugly subject.  When I was in third grade, learning about the history of slavery in America, I wouldn't even say the word out loud because it disturbed me so greatly.  And there were no black children in that classroom or even in that school.

      My sense is that a lot of white people do look at Obama and think, Hey, here's one I could vote for - he's like "us."  I definitely do not think that putting him in the White House will end the difficulties of race relations.  Also, "deepest desire" is overstating the case, IMO, and yet the diarist brought up many excellent points for discussion and consideration.

      by Montague on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:46:54 AM PDT

  •  I agree about that foreign language thing

    I was tempted to write a Southern White Man's response myself - it wouldn't have been this...

    Guilt? Not the right word.  I have made more than my share of bad decisions and mistakes.  The fact that I am still a homeowner, still well-employed, still able to put bread on the table despite these mistakes comes 100% from "where I came from". And someone whose heritage isn't mine could do far less wrong and be far worse off as a result.  That's not fair, and I don't really feel right about having that advantage.  Is it guilt? I don't think so. But I do feel the need to work to fix the inequity.

    And that's my disagreement with "Musings". I don't know about others around me (and if I had written that diary, I would have been talking a lot about those people), but rather than a one vote, one president band-aid - I want to dispel my ambivalence over my unfair advantages by helping erase them - and will only feel that burden lift when I see them gone.  Probably not in my lifetime.

    There's so much more, but it's so hard to discuss...

    by smijer on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:19:53 AM PDT

    •  Feeling shame about America's past is different

      from being responsible for it.  And constantly trying to create a better democracy is what we are all doing here.  

      I believe the self-described "black woman" who wrote the words in question is seeking something that will never happen.  Namely, "justice" for hundreds of years of crimes against humanity, and against her family.  

      There is simply no way to genuinely "make up" for all of Western Civilization's horrendous crimes.  The only way is to move forward as one nation, with an acknowledgement of those crimes, and strive to do better in the future.  Starting now.  I agree there has never really been an acknowledgement of those crimes.  But to insist on putting Americans in political "camps" based on their skin color and their ancestors is to condemn all people to never being able to escape the sins of their fathers or make a live as their own individual.  We need to progress as a nation to the point where Barack is not a "black" candidate.

      Learning to speak the same American "language" would be a good start.  

      Let's hope we can eventually do that.

      by recontext on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:26:46 PM PDT

•  I Agree With The Spirit of What You're Saying

  But you're overlooking present oppression in things like housing, healthcare, basic equality stuff.

  True ... you aren't to blame for slavery, and I'm just as bored with the subject as a weapon against people who weren't there as you were.

  But there are elements to racism that we very much are responsible for.  I'm guessing you know that.  But I just thought I'd point it out.

  by Detroit Mark on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:19:07 AM PDT

  •  But everything

    you said about reasons for voting for Obama, et al...dead on.

    by Detroit Mark on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:20:05 AM PDT

  •  well aware

    of the existing racism in our country (and all countries).   I see that as a problem in my community that needs to be addressed, just like the war and poverty and many other problems.  I don't expect electing Obama will make that better or worse in any real meaningful way to the poor minority kids in my community.  

    by onemadson on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:27:40 AM PDT

  •  It' s not just black people who are oppressed,

    the POOR are oppressed period.  And there are lots of poor people of all colors.

    by Scottsdale Jack on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:38:43 AM PDT

    •  I think that's a really good point

      that often gets overlooked.  Classism is a HUGE problem, and should be discussed as often as racism, sexism, etc, imo.

      by balancedscales on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:45:43 AM PDT

      •  in my community

        the bigger issue is classism as far as I can tell.  The fact that the poor people are also black just makes it easier for people to use their racism to really not give a damn.  

        I've worked in the poorest community in my city in various capacities.  Bits of volunteer work, political stuff.  Even in the time I've spent there is a pretty clear message.  If you can get out, you do.   And most who do don't ever come back.  Can't say I blame them.

        by onemadson on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:12:34 PM PDT

        •  I think there's both

          And I don't think it's useful to blur the lines.

          There are those who would say "no" to a black renter even if he or she took 60K a year.

          And there are those who would snub someone who was poorly dressed and smelled badly no matter how white they were.

          Two different kinds of oppression, and not the same.

          by Detroit Mark on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 02:08:19 PM PDT

          •  there are grades of oppression? n/t?

            by balancedscales on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 02:22:50 PM PDT

•  My (English) bookclub...

  is reading To Kill a Mockingbird for next month. I'm tempted to tell them to read Black Boy next. Though Black Boy was written much earlier than Mockingbird, the difference in viewpoint is telling, and resonates even now.

  by northsylvania on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:36:40 AM PDT

•  what stuck in my craw in the original

  diary was the "white man disconnect" which I see here too.

  From Conversations With My Dad:  

  "I sort of rolled my eyes and said "Dad...........Barack and Michelle Obama both have advanced degrees and are bigtime overachievers...........do you really think they have a lot of sympathy for people that take advantage of the welfare system and tear up affordable housing?"

  Since that author felt a disconnect he assumed that Barack and Michelle Obama saw thing like he did as they were "his kind of people" because they have the same "credentials."

  by Rolfyboy6 on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:37:59 AM PDT

  •  It's a reasonable assumption;

    Obama isn't arguing from a position of identity politics.  It's not some crazy displaced racism, it's a fair assumption based on how Obama has presented himself.

    by burrow owl on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:44:59 AM PDT

    •  That he's disconnected too?

      by Rolfyboy6 on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:48:54 AM PDT

      •  No, that Obama isn't an identity politician,

        and will fold problems of race into problems of class - eg, those problems will be seen generally as subsets of other problems: problems of class, problems of a lack of social mobility, etc.

        by burrow owl on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:53:34 AM PDT

        •  Ah, so then racism will just fade away

          into a golden future?  There won't be redlining and innuendo and double pricing any more?

          by Rolfyboy6 on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:05:47 PM PDT

  •  I understand the reaction

    to the first diary.  Hell, its a written from the POV of someone who says their dad is a really nice guy other than his racism.  That is a tough story to tell.  

    by onemadson on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:48:59 AM PDT

    •  the author has evolved somewhat from Daddy

      but he still sees a whole group as "those people", i.e., not "us".  Easy separation from himself via making the blue monkeys 'not monkeys' since they're blue.

      by Rolfyboy6 on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:10:28 PM PDT

      •  rolfy

        I grew up in rural america, in two different states.  There were no black people in any of the communities i lived in.  Or Jewish people.  Or mexicans, asians, etc.   Zero.  This was 20 years ago but there still are plenty of communities like that.   But they still are voting in our elections.  To people in those communities inner city minorities are "those people".  NYC Jews are "those people".  They are foriegners who are only seen on TV.   I've lived in communities where many of the residents had never left their town.  Ever.  Imagine living 3 hours from NYC your whole life and never going to visit?  

        When you think about that woman's (the author was a woman) father, you might want to think about that perspective.  Bill Cosby and Colin Powell are the only black person they have seen other than the black criminals featured on all the crime shows and the nightly news.    Perhaps they see some rappers on MTV.  That probably doesn't help matters much.

        It would be nice if everyone thought of everyone else on this planet as "us".   They don't.  And the media doesn't help.  And that is all some people have to go on.  If that woman's father made a comment about Iranians being ruthless terrorists, could you blame him?    That is the message we are constantly given my our politicians and the media.

        by onemadson on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:20:42 PM PDT

        •  So they jumped for the stereotypes

          Like you did and are therefore to be excused for lack of thought?  Note that the father and the son were in the Air Force for years and can't claim your lack of knowledge nor lack of examination.  Excuse, me, but you're trying to alibi non-responsibility here, the very disconnect we're talking about.  interesting isn't it that it should be a mirror (or the same) of the "Those People" separation.  This kind of alibi makes you another kind of "Those People."  the author of this diary has this problem, a sense of separation rather than commonality.

          by Rolfyboy6 on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:31:42 PM PDT

          •  no

            i'm trying to say that we need to understand where people are coming from if we want to solve problems.  it doesn't excuse behavior.   It seeks to understand it so we might be able to change it.

            While working as a volunteer with another woman (white) in the city the woman was spotted across the street by a young black girl on her front steps (probably 5-6).  The young girl yelled, "fuck you you white motherfucker!" at the woman.  Completely unprovoked.   While I find this frightening, I don't blame the girl or even her parents (much more likely parent, or grandparent as two parent households are almost non existent in this part of town).  I try to understand why this is happening.

            if we can't understand how "those people" view the world, we will never start to solve the problems.  

            by onemadson on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:51:20 PM PDT

          •  Ok, jumpin in here

            Excuse me if I'm replying to a dead thread. To tell you the truth after the gutting I got after the original post, I didn't want to come back at all to Kos all week. Had a stomachache all week long just thinking about it.

            It's not the "father and son" Rolfy, it's the "father and daughter", as other posters have said.

            I don't feel about black people as "those people". I was just making a very serious point that Barack and Michelle Obama are indeed "overachievers" in this society. Certainly they have achieved more than I have in my life. I feel I've achieved quite a bit, but they have me beat by a mile.

            There is no damn disconnect. In case you don't know it, the military in the 50s was the ONLY integrated portion of American society. I went to school with black children throughout my youth, at a time when George Wallace was blocking the entrance to all-white schools with his pudgy little racist body. (To give him some credit, he repented greatly of that later.)

            By NO means are the only black people I know Bill Cosby, Colin Powell, and black criminals. My boss is a black man, as are many of my colleagues at work. (And no offense to you, onemadson, I know the point you were trying to make, and it's a good one).

            I was trying to give a flavor for my Dad's point of view, that's all. I think the class/race divide in this country is being ruthlessly pushed by Bushies/Republicans/Corporate interests.

            I don't think of black people as "those people" but I'll tell you who I do think of as "those people" is those criminals in the White House, and all these criminal corporate entities that want to destroy the middle and working class in this country.

            Does that help any?

            Like you, onemadson, I'm not going to waste time feeling guilt for something I didn't do. I didn't do it. I can't help it. People are bastards and they do horrible things to each other. I want to stop them from doing that. As do you. 'Nuff said.

            by Rosebuddear on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:13:30 PM PDT

  •  yeah you know what?

    In the first place that author is a "she" not a "he" and in the second place I don't "assume" anytthing. I really like this diary precisely because it doesn't assume a lot of stuff.

    I have never ever in my life gone for the "his kind of people" stuff. Eeeeuuuuuwww.

    by Rosebuddear on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:41:56 PM PDT

    •  If there's a point to your comment

      It certainly isn't clear.  Gender was avoided for a reason.

      by Rolfyboy6 on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:45:44 PM PDT

      •  I believe this woman

        wrote the coffee with my dad diary, that might help explain the comment.  

        by onemadson on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:52:02 PM PDT

        •  Ah

          It's unfortunate that English hasn't yet evolved gender neutral rhetorical third person pronouns.  The disconnect issue remains.

          by Rolfyboy6 on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:55:18 PM PDT

          •  just a question...

            What languages have evolved gender-neutral pronouns?  Spanish?  No.  Thai?  No.  Italian? No. Gaelic?  Not to my knowledge.

            Those are the only ones that I'm really familiar with, so this is a serious question.  I'm a bit of a linguist and would love to know.

            Thanks!

            by balancedscales on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 02:26:30 PM PDT

            •  None

              so far as I know.  English leads the way.

              Within this generation we have seen the disappearance of feminine forms of occupational and legal name forms.  There is no more "Executrix" or "Ambassadress",  however some of the most common ones remain, "Actress" and "Waitress" (the ungainly "waitperson" is a misguided usage which preserves unnecessary gender), however "Stewardesses" are now mostly "stewards."  This process is probably mid way now.

              Most other languages have gender embedded at the subconscious level with their gendered articles "El" or "La"; "Le" or "La"; German has male,female, and neutral, "Der", "Die" and "Das".  This embedding implicitly divides the world into genders.  English is a rare language to have only a genderless article "The" (which was the female article 600 years ago).

              Another item of interest is the appearance of women using "she" in the third person rhetorical--that is, when discussing things in the rhetorical case such as, "If an ordinary person were to go to Washington to see a Senator, wouldn't she require an appointment?"  A generation ago this form was unknown, it would have been universal to use "he".  Last night Clinton used that form once and nobody seemed to notice.  

              English, or maybe I should say Anglic, rolls on.

              by Rolfyboy6 on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 03:32:37 PM PDT

•  you're right that most white folks don't care but

  you're wrong that they never think about it. Every white person has thought about it when they hear someone talk about the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow.

  Guilt is a non-issue. (In fact, guilt can lead to denial of the inequalities that exist in our society. Nobody likes feeling guilty.) Guilt should not be the issue. Nobody should ask white people to feel guilty, and most white people have nothing to feel guilty about.

  The issue is if they're doing something to help. Even just admitting there is a problem is an important step. You can admit there is a problem that we've all inherited without yourself being a part of the problem.

  But I think Shanikka is onto something. I think there is a certain "shut up" value that nominating Barack has. I know you won't believe me. But if and when he gets the Presidency, don't be surprised to hear the talking point: "oh come on, you have to stop that victimhood mentality... we have a black president for god's sake!"

  by danthrax on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:44:32 AM PDT

  •  Then comes self-blame

    But I think Shanikka is onto something. I think there is a certain "shut up" value that nominating Barack has. I know you won't believe me. But if and when he gets the Presidency, don't be surprised to hear the talking point: "oh come on, you have to stop that victimhood mentality... we have a black president for god's sake!"

    What must be really awful is never knowing if it's racism or something you did - a child blaming himself for getting unfavorable treatment from a teacher.

    by catfish on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:49:13 AM PDT

    •  Stop thinking about what you did

      It's not about you. Think instead about all the ways society is structured to give you an advantage for having white skin. Don't feel guilty about, but don't deny that it is there, ignore it for the most part, and get angry and defensive when somebody wants to talk about it.

      by bankbane on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:22:52 PM PDT

      •  Never said it was about me

        it's just disgusting! My NY resolution is to stop reading the horrific comments on SFGate. But if I see one that is abusive - that says "THESE PEOPLE need to stop having so many kids" when the article mentioned a parent with one child - I flag it for the editors. But it happens so much "THESE PEOPLE need to stop parenting children with multiple partners" who ever said that woman's two children had two fathers? it's outta control. I've long suspected the Bay Area liberals thought themselves more enlightened about race b/c liberals are supposed to be. Then they never work on their perspective. Liberal righteousness can resemble Christian righteousness.

        As a woman I wonder if I'm shunned at a a job with all male colleagues because of my competence or my gender. People like people who resemble themselves.

        I don't feel guilty about it.

        Please don't tell anybody how to feel. Ugh.

        by catfish on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 01:51:42 PM PDT

  •  danthrax

    I believe 100%.  If Barack is elected there will be a large portion of the white population who says exactly what you have said they will.  The thinking will be "if a black guy can become president, black people no longer have any excuse if they don't succeed" or some variation thereof.

    No one will mention that we've had a long string of white male presidents and a whole lot of white males are fucking losers.

    My point is simply that this whole idea of "white liberal guilt" gets a whole lot more credit than it deserves.  

    by onemadson on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:52:44 AM PDT

    •  I think that's fair but I would add...

      that it's not really just liberals. And it's not just guilt. It's a lot of average white folks who really are sick and tired of the race issue -- whether they're guilty, in denial of their own guilt, or simply sick of feeling like other people expect them to be guilty.

      For one group of people, Barack is the "shut up about racism!" card. And for another group of people, Barack is the "let's do something about racism" candidate. It's a paradox that eats away at the center of his candidacy, which is based on unity. One of these factions is going to be disappointed once Obama gets elected, but Obama is careful not to offend either of them.  

      (PS: I consider myself an anti-racist before I consider myself a liberal or a Democrat, and I don't think guilt is a necessary or helpful ingredient to solving this race problem.)

      by danthrax on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:31:03 PM PDT

•  Sort of Agree - it's not guilt

  None of my ancestors own slaves.

  But when I sense I'm benefiting from white privilege, because of the unconscious bias of many, well it just isn't right. Like reading comments on sfgate.com - so many commenters there display unconscious racism toward blacks, it's awful.

  by catfish on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:45:54 AM PDT

  •  priviledge

    I'm a white male with an ivy league education.  I'm well aware of my priviledged status.  Its certainly not fair.  

    My wife and I have an apartment in our building that we rent out. We live in the middle of the city but in an upscale neighborhood.  And our city is very segregated.  Two blocks away its almost 100 black and poor and where we are almost 100% white.  The complete lack of interaction between these two communities who are 2 blocks apart still amazes me but that is a subject for another diary.   We, of course, want good tenants in our home.  And when we get voice mails or phone calls we judge people based on how they speak, how professional they are, etc.  Something everyone does in every interaction in daily life but once you've had a bad tenant in your own home, you look for every clue you can.  The tenant we've had for the last two years is moving out.  When he initially called and left a message he sounded pleasant and professional but there was no doubt he was a black man based on his voice.  I called him back to set up a showing for the apartment.  When I did he thanked me and said, "thanks for calling back, no one else has been returning my calls".  

    Did I give him some preference because I figured he might not get a fair shake from other landlords as a black man looking for an apartment in my neighborhood?  Yes.  Not subconciously but on purpose.

    Do I think every other landlord in my white neighborhood didn't return his calls because he sounded black?  Yes.

    Did I do it because I felt guilty about my priviledge?   I guess you might call it that.  I see it as doing the right thing.  I could cite other similar examples of my behavior that have nothing to do with someone's race. And if Barack is elected i don't think I'll be changing my behavior.

    by onemadson on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:04:37 PM PDT

•  An allegory:

  Suppose you are scheduled to inherit a large sum of money.  Suppose that that money was obtained by killing some group of people and stealing their money.

  Should you feel guilty if you claim the money and spend it to enrich your life?

  This (off the top of my head, thus quite imperfect) analogy gets at the notion of white privilege*.  If I as a white person accept white privilege and do nothing to fight it, then yes, I should feel guilty.  The response that feels morally appropriate is to fight white privilege, wherever and whenever I can.  And to teach my children to be, not just non-racists, but anti-racists.

  *further reading on white privilege here.

  by mtullius on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 11:54:53 AM PDT

  •  fighting wrongs, working for what is right

    You either do that or you don't.  Because you think it is morally appropriate.  

    There are poor mexican immigrants in my community.  Technically they are criminals.  Should I help them if I get a chance or should I try to get them deported?  As far as I know there is no reason for me to have Mexican Guilt.

    by onemadson on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:09:13 PM PDT

    •  Sorry, but

      I really don't understand what you're trying to say.  Care to clarify?

      by mtullius on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 02:23:54 PM PDT

      •  i'll try

        I try to help people, when i can, but i don't make the distinction of who i help by race or some guilt about the US history.   But you can be 100% sure i do make that distinction on class.   It's pretty obvious who needs help.  

        by onemadson on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 03:40:58 PM PDT

  •  OK

    So do I vote for the black candidate because I should be guilty over black oppression, or the female candidate because I should be guilty about sexism, or the son of a mill worker, because being in the upper 10% of incomes means I've oppressed poor people, or the Hispanic candidate because of Hispanic oppression?

    Or should I vote for Huckabee because I participate in a web site where some people violently attack and hate evangelical Christians? Or McCain because some people hate the military? Or Romney because the US has a history of oppressing Mormons? Maybe Fred Thompson has some Native American ancestors.

    Cuz if I'm going to fight white privilege, as you suggest, then I need to deal with all of those, and who I vote for is certainly the kind of "morally appropriate" action you advise.

    Maybe I'll just keep on trying to be a decent person and doing the best I can, and not lose a lot of sleep over all the guilt you think I should feel.

    by badger on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 01:43:22 PM PDT

    •  Did I suggest

      that any of this had anything to do with voting for a particular candidate?

      Are you saying that you reject the notion that there is such a thing as white privilege?

      Or are you saying that you don't care whether there is or is not; and that it is not your problem?

      Or something else?

      I'm not really clear on what you mean, since you spend most of your comment on an issue I didn't even raise.

      by mtullius on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 02:26:42 PM PDT

      •  Voting seems to be

        "morally appropriate action", which you advocated.

        Otherwise, I think the idea I should feel guilty for all the things I (and most of my ancestors) didn't do, and things I wouldn't advocate is pretty foolish.

        I don't think my feeling guilty is going to get anybody a job or an education or put food on their table. I think talking about how guilty one feels is a good excuse to continue to do nothing about it and ignore the responsibility of solving real problems. I think how I live my life and help the people around me is more important than what somebody else's great-grandparents did a hundred years ago.

        So I'm saying I don't care if there is such a thing as white privilege, and if there is it isn't anybody's real problem, and the solution to real problems won't be found by all of us sitting around feeling guilty about things we never did.

        by badger on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 02:46:32 PM PDT

•  Well ...

  ... I think you are mischaracterizing the notion of institutionalized racism by your interpretation of what you quoted, and most especially refraining from acknowledging institutionalized racism's present-time reality:

  ...and all its institutionalized racism in the present generation.

  Sadly, your rebuttal is not an original one and the blogs of people of color remark upon that meme very often, the one that says "well I didn't have anything to do with slavery, etc., so I feel no guilt."

  Really, it's not about guilt at all, and I don't think the diarist is saying that it is in the section you quoted.

  For example, Atlasein at Upside-Down Adoption remarks upon this mind-set and to me it shows that the notion of "white guilt" is merely a phase, at most, in coming to terms with institutionalized racism, a phase that often becomes an end in itself and derails any kind of real understanding.  (all emphasis mine):

  I started off by thinking about a difference I've noticed between several different types of white people and their psychological development. I don't want to generalize. Some white people grow up in an environment where they're a minority; for example, a white girl I knew who grew up in a predominantly black neighborhood in Brooklyn. They tend to develop a refreshingly pragmatic attitude about race. Others from that kind of environment react in the opposite way by closing ranks with other white people and establishing firm prejudices. On a different path, white people who grow up in monocultural white environments tend to exist in blissful racial ignorance until they go off to college, then go through a racial identity shakeout period.

  ....

  Now, any further criticism of whiteness or racism can potentially trigger the guilt/resentment dynamic. For example, a simple criticism of institutionalized racism.

  "Those people say I am benefiting from a system. This system was established by white people. I am supposed to feel GUILTY because of the actions of white people in the past. Well I RESENT their attempt to make me feel GUILTY. White people aren't the only oppressors after all..." They begin a rambling unnecessary series of defensive maneuvers.

  (The most regressive white people don't even go through a guilt phase, because they see non-white people as victims totally deserving of their victimhood due to innate, biological flaws).

  The healthy and pragmatic approach is to not feel guilty in the first place, or else work through and move past the guilt/resentment dynamic.

  Either you understand that there is institutionalized racism in this country or you deny it.  That's your choice.

  I see it all over the place.  I don't think it is difficult to see it.  I'm not talking about folks who hate black people, bigotry, none of that.  I'm talking about what is called "white supremacy," something that is inherent in our society and will not be healed unless it is looked at openly and honestly and affirmative actions taken to change this.

  So a white person can benefit greatly from this power structure and have no idea whatsoever that they are benefitting.  Again, you either agree that is a a reality or you don't.

  If you do agree that we have institutional racism in America, then guilt or not guilt isn't the issue.  Unfortunately, as described in the post I linked to in this comment, all too many people reduce this debate to "white guilt."  It serves no one.

  I don't think the words you quoted were saying that folks are consciously trying to "free themselves of guilt" as one of their top priorities.  I think that is a misreading of the quote and that you are taking it out of context.

  I do think many folks who never give racism much thought will indeed go through a kind of guilt and even resentment at even having to deal with the kind of institutionalized racism they may benefit from but do not wish to confront.

  I have to disagree entirely with the reasoning in this diary.  Again, what you are saying has been said so many times that it has pretty much turned into a meme in itself.

  Before we broke through hidebound thinking in the progressive blogosphere, many of us had to shed preconceptions about our roles as citizens and face some pretty difficult truths.

  I think the same can be said about institutionalized racism.  It isn't about guilt and I don't think the diarist was encouraging anyone to feel guilty.

  by Nightprowlkitty on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:14:39 PM PDT

  •  you missed my point

    Or at least I think you did.  I'm believe racism as alive and well as ever in America.    But if people are going to make decisions based on "white guilt" being some powerful motivator, they are making decisions based on faulty information.  That was my point.  I agree with a lot of what Shanikka said.  I just think she is making an incorrect assumption with this bit of her argument.

    I don't think it exists in any large way.  Does it exist on college campuses where people start to get a dose of reality with race in america?  Sure, for some kids.  Lots of those types of experiences happen when kids get to college and out from under their parents worldview.  If I recall the book correctly, Obama tried to embrace his "blackness" in college.  That is what college kids do.  

    My point is that I don't think white guilt is driving the voting for Obama.   I highly doubt it.  

    As I said, I've never heard a white person mention this and I've had a lot of discussions about race with a lot of people.

    As for my own personal absence of guilt, I figured I'd should give my honest assesment if I was writing about it.

    Again, what you are saying has been said so many times that it has pretty much turned into a meme in itself.

    I'm well aware other people have said they don't feel guilty about slavery or institutionalized racism.  Hell, plenty are proud of it.  If you can show me people who have written that a collective white guilt only exists in the consciousness of black bloggers, please do.  
     

    by onemadson on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:31:00 PM PDT

    •  I don't think ...

      ... Shanikka was saying that folks are all going to make assumptions when they vote based on "white guilt."  She is clearly seeing it as a factor in how folks speak of Obama, and I see no contradictory evidence to show she's not speaking the truth - and plenty of evidence to support what she has said.

      The problem with your diary is your own assumption of what Shanikka is referring to when she writes about white guilt, amply evidenced by your long assertion that you don't feel any "white guilt."

      I think your interpretation is incorrect.  I don't think she's making general assumptions.  I think she is reflecting her own experience in hearing and reading what others have to say on this.  I have seen and heard the same, especially in our traditional media.  That's pretty much the whole point of not "racism" but "institutionalized racism."

      The fact that what you have written is pretty much a stereotype on the issue (as per my quote, but there are many more and they're much less conciliatory than what I linked) shows your own erroneous assumptions on what folks are trying to say here.

      You say you are well aware of this line of reasoning -- I say it is a false line of reasoning, and if this is the sum total of what you had to say about Shanikka's diary, in writing an entire diary of your own based on those quotes from hers, you are headed in the wrong direction.

      by Nightprowlkitty on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:52:54 PM PDT

      •  ok.

        she wrote this

        unifying in an effort to fulfill one of their deepest (yet rarely acknowledged and usually vehemently denied) desires since the 1960's:

        White people unifying in an effort to fullfil one of their deepest desires.

        That is a pretty powerful statement saying white people are all coming together around one of their deepest desires.   I don't see how i'm missing the point of that statement.  

        What I'm saying is, the premise is wrong.  In general, white people don't care one bit about "white guilt".   Maybe they talk about it on college campuses in liberal arts classes.  It ends there.  My point is, Shanikka is making a mistake in assuming most white people give this any thought.   I think she has strong and interesting arguments, I think they would be stronger without this statement.

        To me its like saying rich people really wish poor people would stop complaining about being poor.  Based on my experience, I can tell you, rich people don't give a shit about what poor people think.  

        The problem with your diary is your own assumption of what Shanikka is referring to when she writes about white guilt, amply evidenced by your long assertion that you don't feel any "white guilt."

        If i missed the intention of the "deepest desires" statement than I agree with you that my diary is pointless, because that was my only point.   The statement seemed pretty clear to me.

        by onemadson on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 01:47:33 PM PDT

        •  Left out something ...

          ... that quote begins (emphasis mine):

          What I see happening instead, as reflected in this diary and many conversations I have observed and read, is white people, left and right wing, subconsciously unifying ...

          I see it happening as well, both what I hear in conversations and read on the blogs.  I think Shanikka is pointing out, primarily, that this phenomenon is clear on both the left and right, not just with racist neocons.

          Subconsciously unifying.  Hardly a claim that folks are physically coming together en masse to support Obama because of a possible alleviation of "white guilt."

          Seemed "pretty clear to me" that she was not saying there's a consensus among white folks that their deep desire is to alleviate their own guilt.  Quite the contrary, she declares that too many folks vehemently deny this.

          As you have done in this diary by denying white guilt on your own individual part as a rebuttal to what she has written.

          So yes, I think you did misinterpret the statement Shanikka made and have taken it entirely out of the context of her diary.

          by Nightprowlkitty on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 02:10:21 PM PDT

          •  hardly

            saying that one race is subconsciously unifying around an offensive concept is a pretty strong assertion.   She says they "deny" it but is asserting that it is there anyway.  That is the nature of much racism.  Saying "i'm not racist, i have black friends and I loved the Cosby Show" and then being racist.   I think that is pretty clear about what she said.

            Perhaps you should check out my diary from two weeks ago on race on this site.  You seem to be hung up on the fact that I said I don't feel white guilt which to me seems to really be a non issue.  In that diary I was arguing how it seemed ok for people on Dkos to dismiss a black man's opinion on what constituted racism, which I found to be quite troubling.  In that one I got called racist for trying to defend the black diarist's opinions.

            This issue of race isn't an easy one to discuss.  I think we would benefit by talking about it more on dkos.  

            by onemadson on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 02:21:54 PM PDT

            •  She did not say ...

              ... "one race is subconsciously unifying around an offensive concept."  Nor is the concept she is referring to offensive or inoffensive.  I truly believe you are misinterpreting what she said.

              Are you saying you don't believe white folks do get resentful over the notion of institutionalized racism meaning that unless they are affirmatively acting to fight this kind of racism they are benefiting from it whether they like it or not - that they instead call out the meme of "Oh I didn't do anything wrong, I have no reason to feel guilty," when guilt is not asked for but understanding and action is?

              Because your own comment about it belies that.

              I'm not hung up on anything, onemadson.  I am saying you have misinterpreted what Shanikka was saying, taken it out of context to mean she is making a general claim about all white folks, and that your own denial of "white guilt" is pretty much a stereotype in itself and not a real response to the charge of institutionalized racism or white folks' responses to that fact of American life when confronted by it in conversation.

              I'm happy to see folks discussing the issue of race and of institutional racism.  I don't think your analysis here is of help in that endeavor.

              by Nightprowlkitty on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 02:40:14 PM PDT

              •  are you saying?

                here is what I'm saying.

                America is as racist as ever.

                White people get really pissed off if you tell them they are racist.  They will tell you they have black friends.  They will tell you they like Kevin Garnett.  They will hang posters of Beyonce on their walls.  And then they will continue with racist behavior that they don't think is racist.

                That doesn't negate the fact that many of them are racist and contributing to the problem.  

                What I'm saying is white people in America don't give much thought to the idea of "white guilt".  if you think they do, you are making a mistake.  That is my point.  They don't fucking care no matter how many papers some academics write about the concept.  You also need to consider that a lot of white americans are poor, have no health insurance, and are in bad economic shape.   My advice to you would be to not talk to them about their white guilt.

                I'm sorry you think my comments on the issue don't add anything. I'll keep trying to advance this discussion.

                by onemadson on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 02:59:27 PM PDT

          •  Asian American friends for Obama

            they haven't spelled it out, but I have quite a few who are rooting for Obama and they hint PART of their reasoning is they really want to see somebody other than a white male for once.

            I, too, would like to see somebody other than a white male for once. ESPECIALLY when I hear black folks (and older white folks) say America will never elect a black president. People still say a woman can't be a commander-in-chief.

            The Senate is too white and too male - it doesn't look like America.

            (Truthfully Obama is starting to bug me now so I'm leaning Hillary.)

            by catfish on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 02:27:36 PM PDT

•  Guilt, shame, humility

  These concepts have a bad rap in our day and age.  But I think they still have a useful function, and can even be good for us.

  Open up the vulnerability of those scary feelings.  One can even become a better person for it.

  by lgmcp on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:19:09 PM PDT

  •  one

    can

    always

    become

    a

    better

    person

    by onemadson on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 03:52:16 PM PDT

•  You have a lot of courage

  to post this diary on this site.

  I congratulate you for wading in.  The push-back is expected and predictable.  Nothing new has been said here at all.  Indeed, the default isn't in your favor.  I applaud your efforts; if you have the intestinal fortitude to keep going, I would argue that your ethical compass is not to be trifled with.  

  What happened on this site earlier today is a freakin' disgrace.  Rosebuddear did not deserve it.  Talk about being in the wrong place when a train is hoping to come through.    

  by lightiris on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 02:52:32 PM PDT