6 ms·

> It's insane and it leads to conservative resurgence Unclear what you mean exactly. The way I interpret it, please correct me if I'm wrong, is: The concep

> It's insane and it leads to conservative resurgence Unclear what you mean exactly. The way I interpret it, please correct me if I'm wrong, is: The concept of "White Fragility" is so ridiculous and overbearing that it causes white people to retreat to a more conservative stance. In that case, I agree. But I guess you could also mean it as: White people are so fragile in their identities that being forced to be challenged about their beliefs and behaviors causes them to become defensive and retreat to a move conservative position. Which is I think exactly what the author claimed if I'm remembering the book correctly. Either way it's sort of a "heads I win tails you lose" situation she paints, which mostly makes me not interested in playing along.

ajuc 6y ago
> The concept of "White Fragility" is so ridiculous and overbearing that it causes white people to retreat to a more conservative stance. Yup, that's basically it. It sounds especially insane to people from countries without colonial past or history of black slavery. You're stating big universal statements basing them on a specific characteristic of a few countries and if anybody disagree it proves your point :) How convenient.
- dafoex 6y ago
  I personally hate this expression for the double standards it creates. If a minority fights against violence - e.g. police brutality - they are stunning and brave. If white people fight against violence - e.g. rioting and looting - they are fragile Can we not accept that both of these things are worthy things to fight against, or do I have to roll my eyes so hard that I sever my optic nerve at the constant oneupmanship of "who is the most operssed?"
  - war1025 6y ago
    > Can we not accept that both of these things are worthy things to fight against I am pretty certain that the majority of people in the country can agree on that. The trouble is, it's hard to ignore the kid throwing the tantrum in the middle of the room.
  - CrackerNews 6y ago
    As Taibbi wrote in the linked article in the OP, "It’s almost like someone thinks there’s a benefit to keeping people divided."
AnthonyMouse 6y ago
> The concept of "White Fragility" is so ridiculous and overbearing that it causes white people to retreat to a more conservative stance. I think this is underselling it. The problem is that it causes "white people" to think of themselves as "white people" instead of e.g. Americans, or just People. It creates a frame where their team is "white people" and they should get together with their teammates to fight for their interests. (And, of course, the same thing for "black people" as well.) That isn't so much "a more conservative stance" as it is a more racist stance. Describing it as anti-racist is some kind of Orwellian doublethink.
- war1025 6y ago
  > Describing it as anti-racist is some kind of Orwellian doublethink Sort of like anti-fascism.... Per Wikitionary [1]: Any system of strong autocracy or oligarchy usually to the extent of bending and breaking the law, race-baiting, and/or violence against largely unarmed populations. The " to the extent of bending and breaking the law, race-baiting, and/or violence against largely unarmed populations." perfectly describes Antifa's behavior during the recent protests turned riots. [1] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fascism https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fascism
- TMWNN 6y ago
  "Part of left's problem is it expects/demands blacks/hispanics to vote on ethnic basis but is appalled when whites do" (https://twitter.com/JYDenham/status/796345533124186113 https://twitter.com/JYDenham/status/796345533124186113)
  - alphabettsy 6y ago
    This only makes sense if you remove historical and present context. “White” people voting in their interests has often resulted in oppression of non-white people. It’s really not interchangeable since one group is hoping to end oppression and the other is maintaining the status quo.
    - AnthonyMouse 6y ago

ajuc 6y ago

> The concept of "White Fragility" is so ridiculous and overbearing that it causes white people to retreat to a more conservative stance. Yup, that's basically it. It sounds especially insane to people from countries without colonial past or history of black slavery. You're stating big universal statements basing them on a specific characteristic of a few countries and if anybody disagree it proves your point :) How convenient.

dafoex 6y ago
I personally hate this expression for the double standards it creates. If a minority fights against violence - e.g. police brutality - they are stunning and brave. If white people fight against violence - e.g. rioting and looting - they are fragile Can we not accept that both of these things are worthy things to fight against, or do I have to roll my eyes so hard that I sever my optic nerve at the constant oneupmanship of "who is the most operssed?"
- war1025 6y ago
  > Can we not accept that both of these things are worthy things to fight against I am pretty certain that the majority of people in the country can agree on that. The trouble is, it's hard to ignore the kid throwing the tantrum in the middle of the room.
- CrackerNews 6y ago
  As Taibbi wrote in the linked article in the OP, "It’s almost like someone thinks there’s a benefit to keeping people divided."

AnthonyMouse 6y ago

> The concept of "White Fragility" is so ridiculous and overbearing that it causes white people to retreat to a more conservative stance. I think this is underselling it. The problem is that it causes "white people" to think of themselves as "white people" instead of e.g. Americans, or just People. It creates a frame where their team is "white people" and they should get together with their teammates to fight for their interests. (And, of course, the same thing for "black people" as well.) That isn't so much "a more conservative stance" as it is a more racist stance. Describing it as anti-racist is some kind of Orwellian doublethink.

war1025 6y ago
> Describing it as anti-racist is some kind of Orwellian doublethink Sort of like anti-fascism.... Per Wikitionary [1]: Any system of strong autocracy or oligarchy usually to the extent of bending and breaking the law, race-baiting, and/or violence against largely unarmed populations. The " to the extent of bending and breaking the law, race-baiting, and/or violence against largely unarmed populations." perfectly describes Antifa's behavior during the recent protests turned riots. [1] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fascism https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fascism
TMWNN 6y ago
"Part of left's problem is it expects/demands blacks/hispanics to vote on ethnic basis but is appalled when whites do" (https://twitter.com/JYDenham/status/796345533124186113 https://twitter.com/JYDenham/status/796345533124186113)
- alphabettsy 6y ago
  This only makes sense if you remove historical and present context. “White” people voting in their interests has often resulted in oppression of non-white people. It’s really not interchangeable since one group is hoping to end oppression and the other is maintaining the status quo.
  - AnthonyMouse 6y ago