camouflage
gaslit at scale.
explain?
The Alt-Right
- Thread starter Jeff Robinson
- Start date
explain?
crossthebreeze
Well-Known Member
JFC where to start. I can't answer for danny but
a) class identity exists but is far less important than class as structural basis of society.
b) Do you really think that someone is saying that structural racism doesn't exist and there is no connection between race and class when they are referencing a book whose precis is:
Racecraft
The Soul of Inequality in American Life
by Karen E. Fields and Barbara J. Fields
Tackling the myth of a post-racial society.
Most people assume that racism grows from a perception of human difference: the fact of race gives rise to the practice of racism. Sociologist Karen E. Fields and historian Barbara J. Fields argue otherwise: the practice of racism produces the illusion of race, through what they call “racecraft.” And this phenomenon is intimately entwined with other forms of inequality in American life. So pervasive are the devices of racecraft in American history, economic doctrine, politics, and everyday thinking that the presence of racecraft itself goes unnoticed.
That the promised post-racial age has not dawned, the authors argue, reflects the failure of Americans to develop a legitimate language for thinking about and discussing inequality. That failure should worry everyone who cares about democratic institutions.
The Soul of Inequality in American Life
by Karen E. Fields and Barbara J. Fields
Tackling the myth of a post-racial society.
Most people assume that racism grows from a perception of human difference: the fact of race gives rise to the practice of racism. Sociologist Karen E. Fields and historian Barbara J. Fields argue otherwise: the practice of racism produces the illusion of race, through what they call “racecraft.” And this phenomenon is intimately entwined with other forms of inequality in American life. So pervasive are the devices of racecraft in American history, economic doctrine, politics, and everyday thinking that the presence of racecraft itself goes unnoticed.
That the promised post-racial age has not dawned, the authors argue, reflects the failure of Americans to develop a legitimate language for thinking about and discussing inequality. That failure should worry everyone who cares about democratic institutions.
I haven't read it yet either but i looked it up!
CRI
Registered Chooser
I had a lovely weekend away, so only skimming through pages posted while I was away. Christ, are people really getting their panties in such a bunch about an article talking about how white women enable white supremacist men because it didn't say "but not all white women" in neon lights? It's just a variation on the ever popular "not all men" theme, isn't it?
If you fit the broad description of who they're talking about (e.g. white, male, straight, not disabled, etc.) but you know you don't do the things they're describing, just move on, and know they aren't talking about you. If you do get that kneejerk discomfort you describe, yes, sit with it, unpick it, work it through, but shutting the other person down isn't the way to "fix" it.
Expecting someone talking about their experience of structural racism, sexism, etc. to qualify every statement with, "but of course not all . . . are like that," means expecting them to put your feelings first, soothe your discomfort, reassure you your not one of the bad guys. It's making your support for anti-racism, sexual equality, etc. extremely conditional, which is pretty fucking useless - worse, it's perpetuating and validating their oppression. (I don't mean you personally Bimble, just to be clear!)
seventh bullet
sovietwave
What about it?
Treacle Toes
Time
...and how is this bullshit misrepresentation helping this discussion progress?
J Ed
Follow Back Pro Expropriation
It's not a misrepresentation at all of what CRI is defending, it's the way in which anyone outside of a minority of what is basically a subculture would regard those words to mean. Collective blame was assigned to white women for the murder of a white woman by fascists, it makes no sense at all, people don't experience 'kneejerk discomfort' about that because they have something to 'unpick', they are uncomfortable because it is a disgusting thing to say.
CRI
Registered Chooser
Thanks for the Cliff Notes version.
I find the last sentence puzzling though. Any leaders promising a "post-racial" age have either been incredibly optimistic (e.g. Obama) or spouting empty platitudes (just about every GOP politician in my lifetime.) I don't think there is genuine impetus for developing the language to discuss inequality, let alone dismantle the structures and institutions that perpetuate inequality. I think we're seeing how easy it is for the thin veneer of freedom, equality, liberty, opportunity, democracy, civility, and all the other words Americans have always liked to drop when describing how unique, special and morally superior our nation is, to be blown away. Perhaps it was written we got to the place we're in now, where it's looking like those "democratic institutions" are being undermined, I think, to the point of no return.
Treacle Toes
Time
No, that is the worst, most repulsive, possible reading of what was written. Just because you insist it is what she (the author) meant it doesn't make it so.
Seriously stop it. She was clear enough for many of us. Argue she could have been more explicit yes, but this is bullshit.
J Ed
Follow Back Pro Expropriation
When the 'worst possible reading' is the literal reading, perhaps what was written is the problem rather than the interpretation of it.
bimble
floofy
Come on now, that's not a remotely fair rendering of what the woman wrote is it, its dishonest to paraphrase as you have, as if she was seriously asserting that in her view ALL white women screw and nurture nazis. Do you get this angry every time you see a statement about 'men' ?
I suppose you probably do, which is in my opinion a massive waste of energy.
BigTom
Well-Known Member
some white women...
certain white women...
these white women... (probably best for that tweet thread)
structurally white women... (although tbh in the context of that particular anecdote I don't think this works)
There's loads if individual, short words that can simply qualify that kind of statement. People don't like being generalised about and it's worth avoiding.
Yossarian
⏭️
Mahroh Jahangiri's words do seem to have touched off almost as much outrage and discussion as people getting murdered in the streets by fascists.
Is she somebody a lot of people had heard of before this week? Her most recent tweet asks people to use the correct pronoun for a wheelchair user maced during the protests who prefers to be referred to as "they" instead of something gender-specific.
I'm sure she has valid points and all, but when Nazis are actually killing people in the streets, #NotAllWhitePeople seems like more of a distraction than anything.
Last edited:
Treacle Toes
Time
Bullshit. It's not literal, it's your reading. Positioning yourself as some all seeing and all knowing eye is really arrogant.
J Ed
Follow Back Pro Expropriation
Going back to look at the tweet, the author does go on to clarify what she means as being much more universal than what some are claiming here, and I in good faith assumed she might actually mean.
She is literally saying that white women, people here, are complicit in the murder of Heather Heyer. Christ.
She is literally saying that white women, people here, are complicit in the murder of Heather Heyer. Christ.
Yossarian
⏭️
Who gives a fuck? Is she speaking for anyone else, or is she just some random person talking shit on Twitter?
bimble
floofy
Read it properly if you're that fascinated by her tweets, she talks about what happened on the train, and how some white bloke called John came and started shouting at the nazi scum, and how much that helped, that he spoke out, that he picked a side.
If you want to carry on calling her a fanatical anti-all-white women person up to you, don't think its worth bothering tbh.
If you want to carry on calling her a fanatical anti-all-white women person up to you, don't think its worth bothering tbh.
Treacle Toes
Time
Selective quoting which removes what she says from the context of why and how. Well done.
I suppose selectively quoting this one didn't help you to exaggerate in the way you wanted for example.
CRI
Registered Chooser
Figured it was a "certain person," and I can confirm unreservedly that s/he is talking absolute bullshit. Jesus, the mental gymnastics required to achieve that conclusion.
J Ed
Follow Back Pro Expropriation
Selective quoting which removes what she says from the context of why and how. Well done.
I suppose selectively quoting this one didn't help you to exaggerate in the way you wanted for example.
I did read it, the story is clearly linked to her later denunciations which encompass women in general.
Treacle Toes
Time
You have selectively quoted the bits that seem to bolster your argument.
DaveCinzano
WATCH OUT, GEORGE, HE'S GOT A SCREWDRIVER!
Similar threads
- Poll
