The Significance of a Capital Letter
??????In derelict sidings, the poppies entwine / With cattle trucks lying in wait for the next time???
??????????? — Pink Floyd, Your Possible Pasts.
At the office we have an EDI bookclub. Once a month, a book is selected for discussion and growing awareness of the issues of equity, diversity, and inclusion. This month’s book is You Are Your Best Thing, edited by Tarana?Burke and Brené?Brown, and something bothers me about that book. I had just started reading the introduction when I noticed book systematically capitalises the word black, while retaining the lowercase in the word white. It is unfortunate the editors don’t use White. Others take a more consistent stance, and capitalise both [1], even though my personal preference is to keep the lowercase for both. But that is not all that bothers me in this book, it is a minor thing. To me it seems some ideological editing has taken place, casting the narratives in a white-on-black racism mould. Us versus them. The editors appear to use what are indeed some harrowing narratives of blame, shame and discrimination [2] to divide. I don’t want to downplay the stories, but by using them this way, they are degraded. They increase anger and frustration and to direct that anger towards another group, based on skin color. To me that is inducing racial hatred, signalled by the contrasting use of the “B” and the “w”, but woven into the narratives. I had to stop reading.
Here is where my biggest concern lies: the attempts to divide society. This goes far beyond this book: I see it permeate the “Social Justice” movement. The point, it seems, is to stress that black people form a separate community, that trying to be part of the bigger “white” society is doomed to fail. Given the multi-generational effort to change things this is understandable, but what will be the outcome of such a line of thinking? Continued segregation? A separate country as well? [3] Why, then, did we ever oppose apartheid? Where does that leave people who are somewhere in the middle? If you’re neither black nor white, will you be disregarded, will you be called by despicable terms as half-blood, mulatto and octaroon, forced to become part ever smaller communities. Will we follow that ugly “one drop of blood” rule, consider you black if not pure white. Or do we make those communities truly a matter of choice, so that people can choose to join and leave at will, and I can become Black, simply by joining the club and picking up the cultural traits, like I did in my teenage years, listening to reggae, its slower pace better suited to me, having a rasta hair-style fitting my now long gone curly hair and oversized green-yellow-red pullover I knitted myself because it wasn’t available for sale, without being accused of cultural appropriation? Can blacks become White, without being supplemented with such nasty epithets as “coconut”. Can I have a non-white partner without being accused of exoticism? Can a black person chose a non-black partner without being called a race-traitor?
So, the answer to the core question of this book, how can we get white people to be antiracist, I am afraid, is, not this way. I consider myself strongly antiracist even though every mirror confirms I am white. I feel frustrated by the way racism is redefined in such that only white people can be guilty of it. That frustration goes deep, because opposition against this us-versus-them narrative is then treated as evidence of white fragility, a damned if you do, damned if you don’t rhetorical device making any meaningful discussion about the subject impossible.
Further strategies are used to silence the discussion, such as claiming that your arguments cause pain and suffering, or insisting you’re ignorant, either because you’ve not studied the subject, or you’re fundamentally unable to understand it because you do not have the lived experience of being marginalised. No wonder the discussion breaks down [4]. It puts me in a split, because I recognise the issues and do support a more equitable, diverse and inclusive society, but the direction chosen will not lead there. If you still don’t get my point: please try replacing the word “white” in some of the arguments and stories I have seen with “jewish”. Once you do that, and people start recognising it as hate-speech, it probably is.
By blaming everything on whiteness, you lay the foundations for people like Whoopy Goldberg trivialising the Holocaust [5] as some minor white-on-white skirmish that pales in comparison with the horrors of American slavery or the continuing crime of white-on-black racism. Conveniently forgetting that the Holocaust was all about racism. Curiously, Goldberg, a pseudonym, is an Ashkenazi Jewish name she chose very well aware of that fact, so I had hoped Whoopy would have known better. She apologised and I believe, sincerely, but that such ideas can pop-up at all is telling enough. Unfortunately, a lot of antisemitism has seeped into the Social Justice movement, perhaps a response to the actions of the Israeli government against the Palestinian population, were those who once belonged to the oppressed have become the oppressors. But let me avoid opening that can of worms for now [6].
Misguided assumptions of racism also enabled R Kelly, the well-known the R&B artist and sexual predator, to abuse countless young black girls for decades. The reason: many black opinion makers dismissed the white journalists who first published about his behaviour as “trying to tear down a successful black man.” [7] I look forward to the day such assumptions can no longer fly.
Allow me to make the discussion a bit broader. Yes, I recognise racism, both historical and current, significantly contributes to the issues described; still, for every single narrative found in the book, you’ll be able to find a similar story from somebody born in a white skin [7b] (although, statistically, I fully agree black people are disproportionally affected). The stories are not just about racism, they are also about misogyny, sexism, xenophobia, or just simply hatred and greed, poverty, bad luck and lack of empowerment. Hate and indifference work in many ways. I know about the concept of intersectionality, which tries to explain such things as the accumulation of various acts of discrimination affecting groups, but I am not convinced that concept will provide the answer. It still attempts to place people in boxes based on some aspects of their identity, without recognising the unique individuality of each of us. You can tick all the identity boxes, and still fall through the cracks. It will be utterly confusing to the stereotypical straight cis-gender middle-aged white male struggling to make ends meet to be required to repeat the mantra of white privilege; it sort of feels like what happend in the ’60s in China: people starving in streets decorated with banners celebrating the bummer harvest.
Reinterpreting everything as the result of black-on-white racism distracts from the most significant issue in the US and other western societies, and between the so-called developed and developing countries: the huge disparity of wealth and income. It distracts from the obscene fact that a person like Jeff Bezos manages to “earn” the hourly wage of his warehouse workers in just 12 microseconds. It enables a small elite, far smaller than that infamous 1% to “own” a huge chunk of our collective wealth and still proclaim themselves “progressive” when they claim to be antiracists. It also makes it nearly impossible to climb up from destructive poverty, with the predictable outcomes the book describes. It is exactly this disparity, this tolerance of intolerable greed that feeds populism and also lies at the root of the current war in Ukraine, and that same greed may very well plunge the US in a second civil war this very decade.
To fight racism, we must also fight those other forms of discrimination, and first-most the economical inequality that is ripping our society apart. To do that effectively, we should not divide people in groups, but act as one and look at the individual needs of every single person. Simply have enough funding for education and healthcare. Make sure communities have a strong enough social safety net and can invest in their future. I don’t want “Social Justice” based on group membership, I want fairness and justice not restricted by any adjective. Don’t provide extra remedial lessons because you’re black, but because you need them. Don’t extract “reparations” because you’re the white, but ask a bigger contribution because you’re richer. Don’t perpetuate racism in the law by introducing quota for ethnic groups that will forever stigmatise and implicitly confirm some groups are inferior (as what else do they need that support for?) [8], but hire people who can bring new perspectives and ideas to an organisation. To end racism, you must stop being a racist.
I try to follow a more inclusive route towards understanding. Bias (or prejudice), unlike having a darker or lighter skin, is a truly universal trait of human beings. Whereas the diverse colours of our skins is a nice feature that shows humans too are not exempt from natural evolution and we adapt to our environment, even rather quickly in the passing of some 10 to 30 thousand years, bias is part of a much older evolutionary survival strategy. It is better to run away twenty times from anything strange or different and thus potential dangerous, than to be eaten once. But humans are not supposed to get stuck in such primordial responses. Something different is not only a potential threat, it is also a potential opportunity. Let us grow up and see beyond the colour of skin, and discover the human underneath it. It may take some time to recognise our biases, and it takes some courage to step over our fear for the uncommon, but in the end, it simply is a conscious decision to overcome fear, reject stereotypes, and go in search of the individual human being underneath. Besides that, I think it is also important to recognise that the presence of this bias should not be interpreted as evidence that our current society is fundamentally racists, or, more specifically, white-suprematist, because, if you do so, you make it impossible to grow beyond that. (It should be considered here that institutions or positions created to fight a problem, have a perverse interest in making sure the problem they address persists, because the problem's existence has become their reason to exists and source of income, so it helps to declare problems fundamental and unsolvable.)
We also see that biases can be easily compounded and amplified by cultural memes and assumptions. Either unintentionally, in jokes or stereotypical depictions; or intentionally, by politicians who seek to mobilise a following by creating a scape-goat out of some recognisable minority.
Talking about consciousness, I often hear about unconscious bias. Unconscious bias is a bit of an odd thing. I consider the concept unworkable. One contender for the most evil invention in human history is a thing I call a thought crime. For example, those commandments in the Bible that start with “you shall not covet…” define thought crimes. Not the actual act of stealing is condemned, but the desire to have or do something. Framing desire as a “sin” has worked wonders for maintaining the power of the church, by reinforcing a feeling of guilt and monopolising the purported remedy, at the horrible cost of submission. There is nothing wrong with desire; its a given and a great motivator for most of us. Only the way you act upon such a desire makes it wrong or right, and acting, by definition, is a conscious choice. Similarly, having some fear or hesitation on seeing somebody who is different in some way in itself is not evil. It is a natural impulse, and only the way you deal with is either good or bad. And, again, if you’ve grown up in a society that has historically promoted negative stereotypes of other people, having them pop-up in your mind once in a while doesn’t make you evil. Learn to recognise them, reject them, and make sure you don’t hand them down to the next generation, but don’t put yourself to the impossible task of eliminating them — because that is not the way the brain works — don’t allow people to call you racist because those stereotypes are present in your mind; that is just as nonsensical as calling somebody a thief for desiring an expensive watch or a rapist for thinking their neighbour’s wife is attractive. Unconscious bias is the modern thought crime. It is used to shame people for things outside their control.
My-side bias (or in-group bias), is a bias that arises when we start dividing people in groups, and when we see one of these groups as our own. It then becomes harder to acknowledge the mistakes in your own group, and easier to amplify those in other groups. My side is considered better for no other reason that it happens to be the side I found myself in. Such thinking is not rational and increases distance between individuals. It literally reduces our ability to feel empathy for the other even at the neurological level. The easiest way to avoid it, is to avoid thinking in groups. Recognise both the universal, what we all have in common as human beings, and the uniqueness of each individual. It is for that reason that I reject “identity politics” and I don’t want a black society, nor a white one; I even want to get rid of that harmful, nineteenth century idea of nationalities altogether. I want a rainbow society, where every individual can shine in their preferred colours. I don’t like it when people drive a wedge into that (like they did, very symbolically, to the rainbow flag [9]), and that is what I see happening in front of me today.
For me personally, that broad and open rainbow society is existential: it will be the only type of society in which I and my mixed heritage children can live in peace and flourish. It is the only way we all can flourish. It is not about my fear of being “cancelled”, as someone once suggested. For me, it is about survival.
And my answer to how can we get white people to be antiracist is by talking with them. Apart from a small group of white-suprematists (and even for these is hope [10]), most people are of good will, and perfectly able and willing to adjust if you explain them your concerns, if brought in a non-accusatory and coherent way. Condemn behaviour, not people, and certainly not whole groups of people who’s only common feature may be a similar skin color. A reasonable appeal to humanity and fairness are the strongest arguments you have [11].
领英推荐
Since this is a book club with the intention to increase awareness, some suggested literature to contrast this book with:
Three of these authors are black, and one is white. As always, don’t assume I fully agree with the books I suggest. Some are unapologetic politically right-wing, while I consider myself more to the left. I suggest them as another perspective on the issues at hand, and consider it your freedom and responsibility to develop your own judgement. To do so, it helps a lot to step outside your bubble.
Notes
[2]. The Shame Machine, by Cathy O’Neil, a brand new book on I haven’t been able to fully read yet, has a slightly different approach to the concept of shame. I think it can be recommended: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/606203/the-shame-machine-by-cathy-oneil/
[4] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/30/why-im-no-longer-talking-to-white-people-about-race
[7b] A good illustration of this can be found in this book (in Dutch) https://www.raadrvs.nl/binaries/raadrvs/documenten/publicaties/2021/04/07/gezichten-van-een-onzeker-bestaan/Gezichten+van+een+onzeker+bestaan.pdf (Faces of an uncertain existence); many of those faces tell horrid stories, that certainly don’t reflect “white privilege.” In fact, confronting them with that idea is an insult.
[8] Read Affirmative Action Around the World, by Thomas Sowell. His observations regarding the situation in India match my own observations when I was living in India and involved with indigenous peoples (also known as “tribals”). I’ve seen the effect quotas, in place since 1950, have on their status. They simply do not work.
[9] See this article for an analysis of the symbolism: https://qz.com/quartzy/1303522/the-new-rainbow-pride-flag-is-a-design-disaster-but-a-triumph-for-lgbtq-inclusiveness/. To me the new flag feels as that famous slogan from Animal Farm: All animals are equal but some are more equal than others.
[11] Maybe the following book can help: How to Have Impossible Conversations: A Very Practical Guide by Peter Boghossian and James Lindsay
Sоftwаrе Еnginееr at Triodos Bank
2 年PS. Despite Roger Water's despicable ideas and remarks about the current war in the Ukraine, I let the epigraph above this article stand.