1. Resentment about AA doesn't require beneficiaries. The very PRINCIPLE that some people get a benefit because of their race is offensive to those raised to believe that there shouldn't be any. It is very likely that people who have benefited from AA could help show its value... but absent the good testimonies of the benefited, it seems like a principle designed to perpetuate racial unfairness.I appreciate the first two points, but I think the third highlights a piece of especially problematic thinking. We can debate about whether more health care and education will work. But the idea that these sorts of social programs are a gift from whites do to blacks proceeds from a truly frightening premise--that no taxable black citizenry exists. In fact, most black people are not poor. One could take this further and point out that we're all Americans, and that really such programs are just an investment in our collective future. Those high AIDS rates may get poor blacks first, but it's coming around. They'll be hitting the emergency rooms sooner or later.2. As a white person, I have never seen, nor would I tolerate, racist treatment of a black person in my presence. Yet as a white person I have been a victim of race based discrimination by black people on more than one occasion. White resentment, whatever else it may be, has something to do with the fact that whites aren't included in the same code that we are expected to defend.
3. Lastly, white resentment also crops up in responsibility and blame. With the recent news of AIDS rates in the black community we are reminded by the media that the cause of the problem is lack of health care services and education. Just as Ta-Nehisi said some months ago about "the cringe" in the black community at the killing of a white college girl by a black man, there is a white cringe - we aren't providing enough health care and education to help minorities. White cringe happens with a failure to help all minorities; black, asian, the poor, women, immigrants... white people believe they are supposed to do something about it. Sometimes though, we don't think its our responsibility, or our fault. Therefore, resentment.
« More Toby Keith | Main | Especially the blacks and the Jews pt. 233231 » Occassionally, I do this thing...07 Aug 2008 01:47 pm
...where I pull out a comment and respond to it with another post. Should I disagree with the comment, I don't want people to feel like I'm putting them on blast. I greatly greatly value the opinions on this blog even the ones (probably especially the ones) that don't cohere with mine. Anyway, this is commenter ewk elaborating on white resentment:
Comments (20)Comments on this entry have been closed. |
Today's Headlines From The Atlantic |
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
"The very PRINCIPLE that some people get a benefit because of their race is"
... only worth mentioning in the context in which we find ourselves.
That context means that anti-white racism has a very, very different meaning than anti-black racism.
Not to excuse bad acts-- I take the commenter at his word about #2, and that he has been mistreated-- but context matters.
But the idea that these sorts of social programs are a gift from whites do to blacks proceeds from a truly frightening premise--that no taxable black citizenry exists. In fact, most black people are not poor.
this is not an ideological issue; when i supported welfare reform in 1996 several of my white friends immediately responded as their first point that "that would be racist." they were embarrassed when i suggested that the majority of blacks were not poor. but, the archetypical black american, the exemplar if you will, is a poor person for many groups.
as for the issues about public health, well, liberals have a long history of pointing first and foremost to root causes as opposed to proximate behaviors. when there are health problems in the latino community there will be discussion about poverty and lack of communication with the public healthy authorities. but, immigrant latinos are actually on many metrics healthier than white americans! it's their children and grandchildren who have the problems. these children of course are poorer than non-hispanic whites, but richer than their immigrant grandparents. how do you encapsulate sociology X culture interaction effects?
One could take this further and point out that we're all Americans,...
I might think that, and you think that, but we have a majoritarian system of government.
It's impossible to explain the politics -- not necessarily electoral politics, but big-P politics -- we actually see unless there's a widespread belief that some of us are more American than others.
Point #3 reminds me of certain scholarship I've seen (sorry I don't have any cites handy) exploring the difficulty that the U.S. has had with developing the sorts of social welfare programs that seem to be much easier to adopt in European countries -- and the upshot was this: In relatively homogenous countries like Sweden, people find it easy to adopt social welfare programs for the good of the population as a whole, because they feel a kinship with the population as a whole. In the U.S., however, majority groups tend to resist the adoption of social welfare programs because they feel that social welfare programs will not benefit their own group, but instead will act predominately to benefit people that the majority identifies as "other."
Point #3 seems to be a perfect example of this sort of pernicious thinking.
"they were embarrassed when i suggested that the majority of blacks were not poor."
This is true, but often the relevant statistic is of course whether or not black people are disproportionately poor, and they are. Your friends were not wrong in suggesting that welfare reform would affect black people more than it would white people, by percentages.
I would love to know more about the race based discrimination this poster has suffered from. I am especially interested in how it has affected his job, his family, his right to vote, own a home and live in whichever neighborhood he chooses.
I think another point worth mentioning is that the poster lumps in women with the minorities he feels so guilty about not protecting. Last I checked women were a majority. I think what the poster is actually addressing is the burden he feels as a white man in America being forced to take care of those he feels are inferior. The cringe he feels is his guilt for not sufficiently protecting those who need his protection.
In theory AA is there to help individuals in need. However it being divided by race is racist within itself. AA basically insinuates that minorities are less than others. That they cannot succeed without help. In my opinion it should be based solely on income and history (family or personal).
The best example I can give is my wife. She is the oldest child of her parents. After her mother divorced her father her mother married a Hispanic man and had two more daughters. Both of my wife's sisters could go to college for nearly free due to AA (or AA similar) assistance programs. My wife had to pay it most with loans and her own pocket.
Now I'm glad my sister in-laws could get some assistance. However, my wife's personal history is much worse than theirs and it required a LARGE amount of footwork for her to become emancipated from her mother as well find any financial assistance for a daughter of a 3x divorced woman and a convicted felon serving a life sentence.
AA basically says "you're lazy, you're not going to help yourself, and it is all because of your color".
"Yet as a white person I have been a victim of race based discrimination by black people on more than one occasion. White resentment, whatever else it may be, has something to do with the fact that whites aren't included in the same code that we are expected to defend."
Look at how this guy blames "black people" for the discrimination he's received from some black individuals. Because of these individuals, he assumes that "whites aren't included" in the "code" of black people, whatever that is.
"most black people are not poor"
You're right, you're right, you're absolutely right, but - that's not the way it's treated.
Last night I saw a documentary ["Blue Vinyl"] about the dangers of pvc, specifically in its manufacture. Most pvc is manufactured in Louisiana, so the doc went there to investigate, and after going on about how poisonous it is, suddenly started talking about how AA's were being forced out of their homes due to contaminated ground water. It made it sound like the underground contamination was targeting the AA houses.
I knew what that was about though, the whole "disparate impact" line of argurment - that something is kinda racist if the negative effects disproportionately hit AAs. Who they always hit, of course, is poor people, who live near these factories [or lead smelters or waste incinerators] and can't afford to move because nobody's going to buy their contaminated house. Most black people aren't poor, but it seems like most poor people are black. Or at least disproportionately black.
So environmentalists try to gin up some extra outrage by throwing that out there. They're poisoning black people! It would be nice if this weren't necessary, if poisoning any people - even poor people - were bad enough. White has become a proxy for rich and black for poor, and universal contempt for poor people is what drives racism, because of that disproportionate representation. So yeah - equating black with poor doesn't help black people, that's for sure.
I am not a fan of AA, I voted against it when it was on the ballot in Michigan, but I have long thought it was used by a lot of unqualified, uneducated white people as an excuse for their own failings.
When people don't get what they want out of life, I suppose it is easier to blame some imaginary minority who took every good job that you got turned down for instead of figuring out why you really didn't get the job or didn't move ahead or didn't move out of your mother's basement.
My biggest resentment on race is usually directed more at white liberals who try to act morally superior. As someone who is somewhat conservative, I have had discussions about AA with white liberals that end with them implying that it is racist to oppose it.
Without examples, I call BS on ewk's point #2.
I'm amazed by #2 (As a white person, I have never seen, nor would I tolerate, racist treatment of a black person in my presence. - how old is Ewk?
Personally, I've been involved in a bunch of group hiring, procurement, promotion, etc. decisions and I can't say that I have ever seen obvious discrimination against a black person. To the contrary, most of the organizations I have worked for are very eager to increase their diversity.
On the other hand, there have been times when I have suspected non-obvious discrimination in specific cases. (I.e., partner X starts sending less and less work to minority associate A and more and more to white associate B, and obviously believes that B is a better lawyer than A, when I disagree. I can't know based on one data point whether that's racist or not, but I can suspect).
Further on that other hand, I'm sure there is racism I don't even suspect. If someone, including me, decides that a given white candidate is better than a given black candidate, it's very easy to start second-guessing yourself about why.
I'd have a lot more patience with "white resentment" if it truly had anything to do with inequality. But most of the people who invoke it do so because of a perceived threat, the notion that we are under siege because of them, the idea that we are the victims of discrimination, not a resentment for discrimination per se.
There may well be deserving whites who got sidelined because of Affirmative Action, but I have not see any once-propserous white families moving into public housing because of weighted test scores and entrance exams.
On the other hand, I have seen a lot of people of every race, gender and economic stratum injured by a horribly faltering economy.
If you want something to resent, how about the RNC's Southern Strategy, which essentially hooked one end of the jumper cables to white Southern angst, and used the other end to defib a moribund political party that had collapsed after Watergate.
People who pull out mathematically logical arguments about the literal realities of AA are swatting flies with the dictionary, or employing the same Mobius-strip logic that Capt. Queeg used to find out who pilfered his strawberry jam.
No African American has stolen White America's jam.
Nolo, I have read similar things about the Nordic welfare model and how it might respond in the future if they need to let in more non-Europeans as their population ages and the country needs both more workers and more taxpayers to support their generous pensions.
The theory is that the socialist attitude in these countries will lessen as the population gets more diverse. Some have tried denying this by saying Scandinavia has a lot of immigration, however much of it is Finns moving to Sweden or a Swede moving to Norway.
First week on the job and your already killing it Ta...
Calling out blatant douchebaggery by name, cutting off the crackpots and pseudo-scientific jackoffs, and writing totally on point posts, its almost as if the Atlantic were evolving...
I'd like to see a discussion about the phenomenon of "reverse racism" or rather the phenomenon of crying "reverse racism" as I've read over and over again from the 40 year old virgin set...(note: not the movie) or perhaps more broadly a discussion of the difference between garden-variety bigotry and prejudice--something every human being engages in to varying degrees--and racism. Is there such a thing as "reverse racism" in any real sense? Because in my experience its usually just lazily thrown out there anytime anyone discusses the actual history of institutionalized white supremacy in this country.
I've personally seen only one instance of litigable "reverse racism" in my 15 year career as an attorney, but I know there have been more and I won't say it doesn't happen. But they're rare as hen's teeth.
ewk says he has NEVER seen an instance of racist treatment of a black person in his presence?
Hasn't ewk ever seen a black person followed around a store by a clerk, when ewk was not? Or seen a clerk ask ewk if he needs help and NOT ask a black person? Or seen a white teacher accept a joking comment from a white student, but treat a black student's joking comment as disrespectful?
Or what if a black person is not present, but a white person makes a derogatory comment or joke about minorities? Does ewk ALWAYS speak up in this situation?
And of course even if ewk has never seen anything discriminatory does not mean it doesn't happen. ewk has not been a black person trying to buy a house or find a job.
Yeah, I have to ping on point #2.
I'm white. A number of years ago a black co-worker asked me to go with her to look at a new condo. Everyone at the condo was gracious and helpful and she found a model she really liked. When she filled out the form to reserve one they beamed happily, welcomed her to the condo community, and seemed genuinely pleased, but when they checked their records they found that all the units of that type had been sold. A very popular model they told her.
My friend was disappointed and I felt bad for her, but when we got in the car she muttered "bull!" She turned and asked me to call the company the next day and in my obviously white midwestern twang tell them I was interested in buying that model if they had any left.
I was shocked that she suspected that they would turn away someone of her education and salary because of her race. But I called a few days later anyway and they told me... "Yes, we still have some available." I was stunned.
My friend reported them to the county housing office who sent two black and two white testers to buy units and they got the same results: whites yes, blacks, no.
The point is, most non-bigoted whites are not good at detecting racism. Just because you haven't spotted any, ewk, don't think it's rare.
Nolo:
I was under the impression that discrimination in favor of blacks in hiring was standard practice at law firms. For example:
Black students, who make up 1 to 2 percent of students with high grades (meaning a grade point average in the top half of the class) make up 8 percent of corporate law firm hires, Professor Sander found. “Blacks are far more likely to be working at large firms than are other new lawyers with similar credentials,” he said.
Are you saying that this isn't true, or do you mean something else by "reverse racism" (a term which I don't particularly like myself--racism is racism)?
Your friends were not wrong in suggesting that welfare reform would affect black people more than it would white people, by percentages.
they didn't suggest anything. they just said that "that's racism." as a matter of facts
1) more blacks are on welfare than whites
2) more people on welfare at any given time are white than black
3) more blacks are non-poor (working + middle + upper class) than poor
to me disparate impact != racism/prejudice.