Who is Right Regarding "white"?

Download and read my free eBook to learn more about the self-actualization of Chinese elites in the United States.

In a previous article, paradoxes concerning Chinese identity or Asian identity in America have been addressed. Here I want to bring some erroneous ideas about “whiteness” to light.

What is whiteness?

“White” is a socially constructed identity that most experts in critical race theory agree was constructed in the United States in part due to the birth of the United States of America as a new country. This was part of a social process. First, European explorers, settlers, and colonizers immigrated to the West Hemisphere in the 1500’s. The Spanish founded St. Augustine, Florida in 1565. The English founded Jamestown, Virginia in 1607. In that era, it is clear that the concept of race was very closely related to the concept of nationality.

However, the founding of a new nation stirred up a sense of necessity for a new identity. This sense of necessity for a new identity first began to be solidified by Thomas Jefferson who authoritatively formulated a statement of the American creed within the text of the Declaration of Independence. The statement “all men are created equal” has since been criticized for omitting women, and for the irony that at the time that it was written–and unanimously accepted in Congress on July 4th, 1776–slavery was very much alive and well in the then thirteen States. Not to mention the genocide of Native Americans and many other examples that could also be discussed in depth, but for the sake of briefness, will not be discussed here.

Perhaps the first tangible identity to be regarded as “white identity” was the use of the term white Anglo-Saxon Protestant (WASP). For example, Benjamin Franklin, who thought of himself–no doubt–as a WASP, stated bluntly: “The Spaniards, Italians, French, Russians, and Swedes, are generally of what we call a swarthy complexion; as are the Germans also, the Saxons only excepted.”

Furthermore, Franklin questioned whether Germans should be allowed to live in Pennsylvania, writing, “Why should Pennsylvania, founded by the English, become a Colony of Aliens, who will shortly be so numerous as to Germanize us instead of our Anglifying them, and will never adopt our Language or Customs, any more than they can acquire our Complexion.” Within these social groupings that Franklin specifically outlines, it is clear that each has their own language, national origin, and along with that, a culture (customs). Franklin’s concern is not only with language, national origin and cultural customs, but also “complexion”. Today in America, all of the groups mentioned by Franklin would be considered white people by most of us, with Spaniards potentially preferring to identify as Hispanic instead.

Thomas Jefferson, who felt that emigration was a fundamental right, concerning Germans in America, wrote, “As to other foreigners it is thought better to discourage their settling together in large masses, wherein, as in our German settlements, they preserve for a long time their own languages, habits, and principles of government.”

From here it becomes clearer that assimilation is a big concern, specifically whether the new immigrants will learn English, and adopt the American creed as their own. Yet, clearly, “complexion” was also a concern made more obvious by the enslavement of Africans who immigrated to the United States involuntarily through the most unjust means possible. Assimilation to whiteness was a door that was apparently only open to people of the right “complexion” and depending on the popular social constructions of race and ethnicity in America. Over time, the Germans in America became white Americans, and are now the largest self-reported ancestry group in the United States at approximately 17% of the population. Notably, Italian Americans followed (6% today), along with Irish Americans (9.7% today), and many other groups we could look at.

This process and these identity changes highlight for us the complexity of what we today call white Americans and what we may call “whiteness”. We might ask, is “white” a race (the U.S. census would have us believe that it is)? Is “white” an ethnicity? What is the language of “whites”? What is the culture of “whites”? Steve Garner, a senior lecturer in the Department of Design and Innovation at the Open University, suggests that “whiteness has no stable consensual meaning” and that “the meanings attached to ‘race’ are always time- and place-specific, part of each national racial regime”. Aside from skin color, this is all that is left as the criteria of “whiteness”–as vague as it is.

An Ideology Tied to Social Status

We might well inquire about the intersection of socioeconomic status and “whiteness” as well. There has been known to be a correlation between white identity and socioeconomic status. However, bear in mind that correlation does not imply causation. For example, the term “white trash” is a derogatory racist and classist slur used against poor white people, especially from rural southern United States. At times it has been proudly worn by American comedians to successfully employ some self-denigrating humor. The slur is currently in widespread usage and has been picked up particularly by upper- and middle-class white people to denigrate lower-class or poor white people who they do not want to consider “normal whites”. This fact further ties the concept of “whiteness” to social status in the sense that higher socioeconomic status brings one closer to what many in America today perceive as “normal whiteness”.

Honorary White–An Apartheid Era Distinction

The term “honorary whites” was in use in by the apartheid regime of South Africa during the apartheid era, it was used to grant legal rights and privileges to people who otherwise would have been treated as “non-whites”. East Asians were offered this distinction beginning with Japanese, Koreans, and Taiwan residents in the 1960s. In 1984, South Africa amended the Group Areas Act and allowed Chinese South Africans to live in areas the government had declared “white areas” and to use the facilities located there too.

While these events and ideologies may be dismissed in what we might call these “modern times,” it may be more helpful to remember them and to learn what we can from attempting to make sense of it all. Frank Wu, the President of Queens College in New York, clearly was aware of these contexts when he spoke out about Asian American hate crimes and bias in the United States on CBS News in an interview with reporter Elaine Quijano, “It’s a moral dilemma” he reflected, “are you going to declare that you’re a person of color, do you aspire to be an 'honorary white', or do you just get excluded as a perpetual foreigner, right? Those are the options.”

Is There Really Racism Against White People in America Today?

Jeffrey Burl at Michigan Technological University seemed to think so when he stated in an official letter to the University, “I, as a white male, have been systematically discriminated against for 40 years.” Burl claimed that he was a victim of racism and sexism at the University and stated further that “the fact that I expect retaliation is an indication of how hostile I consider the environment at Michigan Tech.” Burl complained that the University discriminates against white males in their hiring practices (writing this even while he was already hired and working for the University).

Do you embrace this paradox, by conceding that racism can happen to white people? The interesting thing about this is that often when white people claim to have experienced racism against them, they speak about it in hypothetical terms and often present paradoxical ideas attempting to prove that racism against white people CAN be real–hypothetically. Which is fundamentally different than proving that racism DOES occur against white people on a scale similar to the way it does against people of color.

The truth is that the historical record shows that “white” was an idea that originated with “white people”. Since that is the case, that no one created this label for them, how can white people claim that they are racialized in the first place? Instead, what can clearly be seen is that “whiteness” involved the absence of race. Race itself was assigned by white people onto political and cultural “others”, only to be removed when that group or individual had sufficiently assimilated to the views of white people. The ability of white people to do this required unequal power in their favor.

As Burl spoke out about being a supposed victim of sexism and racism for 40 years, Burl also spoke out against a resolution that condemned “anti-Blackness and systemic racism” and stated that he had seen no “discrimination against women and people of color” while working at Michigan Technological University. It is notable that Burl did not argue that he wishes he would have been treated as a person of color or as a woman. Burl denied that discrimination occurred at all against women and people of color at the University, while simultaneously arguing that he, on the other hand, had experienced it for 40 years due to his being male and white. So, was Burl “othered” and wishes not to be any more? That does not seem to be the reality, given that Burl is maintaining his stance as both “white” and male (which are both identities assigned to himself, by himself, and by no one else–least of all by people of color or women).

In short, white people may experience PREJUDICE sometimes, maybe even classism, but not racism. Racism has a long historical institutionalized precedence. White people sometimes have negative experiences too with people who do not really know them, but when they are mistreated based on their appearance as a “white person”, it is referred to simply as prejudice.

Further, we might well ask, why do such white people WANT to be considered as potential victims of racism in the first place? Does it have anything to do with fairness? Justice? Equality? Equity? If white means non-race, or even being “un-racialized” if you will, how is racism itself even possible against the complex-philosophical concept of “whiteness”?

Please like, comment, share, and read my other posts and articles for more.