Ignorance

"Surely it is correct to understand some apparently racist comment as coming from ignorance. But ignorance is not always a good excuse. There is such a thing as culpable ignorance. There is the notion "he should have known better" -- which strictly implies that he didn't know, but also holds him responsible for it. It is a very interesting kind of moral judgment."

This comment on one of my previous blog posts by Professor Florka inspired me to consider the topic of ignorance in regards to racial issues. I struggle with how to view those who are ignorant to the point that they do not understand when they say or do something that is racist. These people may be full of good intentions, but their ignorance hinders them from realizing the true gravity of their actions. And regardless of their intentions, their racism only perpetuates the problems with race in society as a whole. So are these people at fault?

This question conjures two types of ignorance of me: willful ignorance and culpable ignorance. I question if the people who are ignorant to racial issues do so willingly or if they are simply uneducated and haven't been subjected to an environment that forced them to confront that ignorance. I suppose that it varies on a case by case basis, but it seems for the most part that those who are ignorant to racial issues in today's day and age may be doing so willingly. Although there are exceptions, a majority of people have been exposed to the history of racial issues and have been taught all about equality and understanding. Because of this, it's difficult to understand how people remain ignorant of how their words could be interpreted as racist, especially if they're judging or assessing a person or concept completely based on race. 

So is this willful ignorance? Perhaps. It's easy to convince oneself that race isn't an issue anymore which would make one less sensitive to the comments they make about race. People sometimes choose to ignore reality because a flawed perspective of the world is more comfortable than acknowledging the real world. People are willfully ignorant about things all the time and it seems logical that race could be another issue that people choose to ignore because it makes their lives simpler.

This brings me to the culpable ignorance mentioned in the above comment. Although it's difficult to assess exactly how severe one's guilt may be in regard to their ignorance, people should be somewhat held accountable for their ignorance if it perpetuates hatred or negativity, even in the slightest. Willful ignorance seems to be the most culpable form of ignorance, but with the topic of race, people SHOULD be aware thus they are subject to guilt if they are not.

Group Event

I wanted to wait to write my blog this week so I could use it to reflect on the group project I did for this Philosophy of Race course. Tonight, my group hosted an open mic night named Silenced Voices which aimed to give students a platform to openly talk about race. We had a handful of poets go up and perform and then followed with a discussion.

I was really impressed with the turn out. There were a lot of different people who showed up and although the numbers weren't huge, getting 25+ students to come to an event the day before Thanksgiving break when  assignments are piling high is great. But I'm not writing this to go over the facts and figures of the event. And I'm not writing it to talk about the poems themselves. Although they were all amazing and touched on topics including welfare, the war on drugs, education systems, racial profiling, and racism as a whole, it was what the discussion concluded with that I thought was particularly powerful.

Ursinus is segregated. We may boast mildly impressive diversity statistics for a small, suburban liberal arts school, but what does that really mean? Is it really diverse if the blacks sit with the blacks and the whites with the whites and the Asians with the Asians? Diversity isn't a statistic, it's a word with broad meaning and should suggest an understanding and appreciation for different types of people. Unfortunately, as we came to decide in our discussion, that type of diversity is absent from this school for the most part.

So why do people group by race? Arguably, it's not that people group by skin color necessarily but rather by a shared common life experience and whether many realize it or not, life experience is often heavily affected by race from the day we are born. As a group, we began to question how we are to overcome such an obstacle and how we are to start forging an understanding between different types of people.

Statistics and events don't make people really get it. You can tell someone the facts and figures of racial injustice but does that make people understand? No. In this society of white supremacy someone's race affects not only their chances to get an education or a job, but also their internal understanding of what it means to live in this world. If we really want to overcome the obstacle of misunderstanding, we have to encourage understanding and empathy. But how do we do this?

At least in our discussion group tonight, we realized that the arts and especially something like poetry can do a lot to forge common bonds among different people. The emotion and true experience that something like art can convey goes much farther to solving the issue of racial misunderstanding than pure statistical data and historical events can. While I still think it's extremely important to be aware of structural and institutional racism as a means to remedying the segregated society we live in, we need to get to the core of things. Art perpetuates the experience of being human, which everyone can relate to regardless of the color of your skin or where you grew up or how society has affected you. Race is such a taboo topic, but it shouldn't be. And art provides people with a safe outlet to talk about the way they feel about race and also affect other people's views on race.

Where's the line?

Something I'm finding myself struggling with is when and where it is proper to analyze situations based on race. Now I'm a chronic over analyzer, taking the things in my every day life and often twisting them in all sorts of ways in my head. Usually just for the hell of it, just to think new thoughts. So perhaps I'm not the best person to be considering where the line is between not considering race enough and considering race too much. But anyways, here's my beef:

When someone tells me I'm "overreacting" because I'll vocalize my discomfort when something blatantly racist is said, I'm automatically pissed. When you're sensitive to an issue like race, you'll pick up on it in everyday life much more often and you're more prone to possibly "overreact" when the issue is not treated as you would like to see it treated. So I don't want to say anyone is "overreacting". But I'm going to.

When you look at the outpouring of articles regarding musicians like Lorde, Lily Allen, and Miley Cyrus, criticizing them for participating in racist dialogue, I think people are overreacting. Don't get me wrong, I think it's still important that there is discourse on the issue and it should 100% be something that people consider when listening to the music or observing the actions of these artists. However, I think a lot of the criticism (at least what I've read) is not to perpetuate knowledge or understanding, but rather violently criticizes in a way that is not the least bit constructive. These artists are a part of the pop culture machine, and I think that attacking an artist's integrity or personal views is not what needs to be done as it does not confront the real issue. The real issue seems to be that the appropriation of certain themes and ideas does not resonate as inappropriate to a majority of people. When you're looking at a Lily Allen music video or a Lorde song, you're looking at a collaborative artistic product that went through rounds of review and refining before it was ever released to the masses. The issue is not artists using racial themes to prove a point, but rather that the whole system was too ignorant to even realize that certain ideas or allusions could conjure racist notions for certain individuals.

This sounds bad. But I don't mean it that way. What I'm trying to say is I don't think a lot of what is criticized today as "racist" in mainstream media really had the intention to perpetuate those viewpoints. Often, these songs or videos are inspired by the byproducts of inherently racist systems or are a result of ignorance. To react negatively to what one perceives to be "racist" is not an issue, but it does seem to be overreacting when one's criticism doesn't consider the other side of the argument. For the sake of progress and knowledge, it's important that people point out when certain works seem racist but at the same time, such an observation is really only productive if it considers how it came to be racist. Especially in mainstream media, there is usually no intention for racism as quite bluntly, it's not marketable in today's day and age. Thus the issue isn't purposeful perpetuation of racist notions but rather the ignorance that plagues the masses. How can we get more people to be aware when they are making allusions to racist concepts? How do we go about erasing that ignorance and informing people? I mean, I guess these critical articles are a start, but they aren't really a solution, are they?

So where is this line? Where is it okay to be blatantly pissed without having to explain yourself because the racism should be apparent and where is it better to accompany your outrage with constructive suggestions in order to make people better understand? Not sure. Great question.

The New Jim Crow Thus Far...

While I have yet to finish The New Jim Crow, I am thoroughly impressed thus far. Michelle Alexander maintains a strong and persuasive yet very honest voice. She mentions in her preface that she has a specific audience in mind for the book, and I feel as though I fit into that audience.  Alexander says she writes for those who have tried to convince the people around them that "... something is eerily familiar about the way our criminal justice system operates, something that looks and feels a lot like an era we supposedly left behind, but who have lacked the facts and data to back up their claims." She hopes to empower her audience, and I could use that empowerment. It's difficult to make unpopular arguments like the ones surrounding race unless you are equipped with the proper information to back up your argument. The argument that racial discrimination still exists in America is not one many want to hear, and in order to convey it effectively, facts and figures and analogies are needed. I hope that as I work my way through the book, I will become knowledgeable about this new racial caste system that has been perpetuated by the current prison system and war on drugs.

Something that has particularly struck me in the introduction is that the U.S. incarcerates more of its racial or ethnic minorities than any other country in the world. I'm always weary of the way that statistics can be skewed or manipulated to prove a certain point. But regardless of however this statistic could be argued, it's horrifying. No matter what other reasons could be attributed to this phenomenon, this is a blatantly race based problem. I had no idea that the U.S. held this position in the world. It's startling and disturbing and more disgusting than I thought. I'm excited to complete this book because I can only imagine that I will stumble across more facts that will completely shake my existing sense of societal realities.

Cadillacs

I was recently watching a documentary entitled "Whitewashed, Unmasking the World of Whiteness" about the privileged experience of being white. I feel like throughout these blog posts I've done a lot of reflecting on what it means for me to be white so although that aspect of the documentary was enlightening, it's not what I want to talk about. One of the people interviewed in the film referenced a quote by Malcolm X that hit me hard. It was, "Racism is like a Cadillac, they bring out a new model every year."

This. This is it. These words make sense of everything in my head. They give logic to all the times I've stumbled around attempting to explain to people how today's society is still racist. Just because we don't see the high school history textbook definition of racism in everyday life does not mean that racism is not around. It is fundamentally embedded in our society's systems and structures, it just takes on different forms and methods as time goes on.

Now I know this isn't necessarily insightful. Nor is it exceptionally revolutionary. But it seems as though once you hit a certain point in studying a subject, the light bulb just doesn't illuminate for you anymore. You don't have those instant revelations anymore. And for awhile I've felt that way about studying racial matters. I am by no means an expert or a scholar or even a mildly experienced researcher. I've taken a few classes, read a few books, but I still always feel stuck when I talk about race. Maybe it's because the vocabulary in place is rarely all encompassing of the major social issues they try to describe. Maybe it's because since I'm white and have never really had to think about race on a "real life" level until now, I'm working from an exceptionally low point of understanding so a simple analogy like Malcolm X's really enlightens things for me.

Well I guess all of my entries do end up about me being white. My whiteness never made me have to truly consider race. My understanding of race began as so elementary that such a simple quote (even after about three years of being finally fully conscious of race issues) could suddenly help things make more sense. It's like I'm learning a new language after already having had a language ingrained in me for quite literally decades. I'm learning a new understanding of race after years of being ignorantly under the impression that there was really no greater understanding to have. It's sad. And I think my experience is something a lot of other white people can relate to.

Debate

A part of Wise's book that particularly resonated with me was Wise's recount of his experience on the debate team in high school. While the terminology and references he makes to debate may have been lost on the typical reader, I found myself immediately reminiscing on my debate team days.

I was captain of the debate team in my high school and the team exclusively focused on the type of policy debate that Wise refers to. Thinking about the team I captained, everyone was white with the exception of one Indian boy. Thinking about the league my high school was a part of, I remember almost every single team being completely white with the exception of one black and a few Asian debaters.

But what makes the practice of debate such an obvious sign of white privilege is not the racial composition of participants necessarily, but the subject matter. Debaters take major world events like terrorism, food shortages, and energy initiatives and prepare an affirmative action plan along with an arsenal of research to negate any alternative plan that comes their way. However, as Wise states, teaching people to make a game out of real life situations is dangerous. Serious world issues are turned into abstractions in which debaters pull apart the details and formulate irrational cause and effect events in order to simply win the game. Debaters are only able to speak freely on the topics of poverty and economics because it is an issue that does not affect them. They can hover above from their position of power and turn policy into game. It is a privilege to have this perspective.

The debate topic I remember most clearly had to do with welfare in the United States. The affirmative plan my team had developed was one in which welfare was slowly phased out and all funds would be reallocated to government approved private charities. In practice, this plan would have disastrous and disgusting effects on society. In debate theory, this was a bullet proof plan that very few teams had evidence against and we had enough biased sources to make ourselves sound right.

What's even worse? I grew up on welfare. And the fact that my family worked itself out of poverty to the point where I now live in a nice suburb and attend a private college can be at least partially attributed to white privilege. There was a tinge of disgust in my voice when I read the ultra-conservative sources which supported our plan by describing how the welfare system is ineffective and is just taken advantage of. But at the same time, there I was, elevated by white privilege playing a game with a social issue that had even directly affected my life.

It's kind of sad to think about. I enjoyed the thrill and excitement of debate, but in the end, it's all just kind of a sad game that prepares people to go on to play the sad game of politics. Whether it's out of touch high school students making a game out of policy or out of touch politicians making a game out of policy, the clouding of perspective that white privilege offers detracts from real understanding.

The Confusion

After an admittedly stressful beginning to fall break filled with either writing papers or agonizing about writing papers, I have yet to start reading White Like Me. However, there is something I wanted to vent about before breaking into the reading...

Two years ago I was in an African American Studies course here at Ursinus that completely changed the way I viewed race. While a lot of different readings and workshops and lectures brought me to radically reconsider how I viewed the issue of race in our society, going to see Tim Wise speak at West Chester was one of the more influential encounters I had that brought me to change my opinions.

Now I don't remember much of what he said if I'm being honest (I remember thinking that he wouldn't be the kind of guy I think I could tolerate for more than an hour or two). And while his personality was mildly off-putting, seeing a white man stand up and actually acknowledge white privilege and why it was wrong in public setting was amazing. At this point, white privilege was a relatively new concept to me (well the theory itself was, I'd been living in it my whole life) thus it was legitimately powerful. As Wise spoke, all of this race talk was finally making sense and the mechanisms in our society which perpetuated a system of inequality were illuminated. I felt as though maybe I was starting to get it. Then I remember a sort of call to arms, urging anti-racists to combat the racial injustice in our society today. I was inspired, but confused... as I still am.

All of this anti-racist talk is great, but no one takes a white person (other than Tim Wise) seriously when they talk about it. White people think I'm overreacting/don't want to hear what I have to say because it would force them to face their racist tendencies. Black people think I'm another white kid who wants to get up on my liberal high horse and chant "equality" from the hilltops because it will make me "different". Am I using rash generalizations right now? Yes. But that's how I feel when it comes to vocalizing my opinions on the issue of race. I'm not sure if it's because I'm white or a female or both but no one wants to take my opinions seriously. On the same note, I'm not sure if I can even take my opinions seriously because really, what am I supposed to do about the issue of race? I care about it. I want to see things change. But this is a socially embedded problem that I can't just fix and if people only want me to shut up when I start talking about the issue, what am I supposed to do?

This is a confusing post brought to you by a confusing girl talking about a confusing issue. Hopefully White Like Me will provide some clarity.