4 ms·

Not really. It's not about being "against" anyone, it's about pretending to not have any responsibility while taking part in a structurally racist system. A lo

Not really. It's not about being "against" anyone, it's about pretending to not have any responsibility while taking part in a structurally racist system. A lot of white people claim to be anti-racists but are unwilling to actually act on it, including the most basic step of speaking up when they see it happen, or acknowledging the existence of structural racism. In other words, their claim is more performative and about convincing themselves and others that they are Good People, than actually being interested in challenging a status quo that obviously wrongs a lot of people. This is also known as being an "enabler" - that is, allowing others to do wrong by looking the other way. "Silence is violence" merely calls this out. It reminds us that we are enablers of this violence if we remain silent. The vast majority of defensiveness I see in response to this pretty much just boils down to worrying about one's own position of being seen as a Good Person (by themselves and by others), instead of worrying about what is actually the right thing to do.

zozbot234 6y ago
If the actual issue is that the system is "structurally" racist, why do we even care about blaming people for their silence, or lack thereof? Isn't it a basic starting point of performing a proper "structural" or "root-cause" based analysis of a problematic system, that one should avoid preemptively assigning blame? You really can't have it both ways, this whole way of thinking makes zero sense.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- yoav 6y ago
  It’s a system of people. So obviously the “root-cause analysis” would only happen if the problem wasn’t an accepted part of society. Why would anyone seek to solve a problem that no one cares about. If half of the population (the people with power) directly benefits from an unjust system, but says nothing about it, it will never be addressed. There is a conflict of interest. How can you benefit from an injustice, stay silent, and still just passively hope it will get fixed? Hundreds of years in isn’t proof enough that sitting around hoping someone else fixes it doesn’t work?
  - zozbot234 6y ago
    Your view that a significant part of the population actually benefits from this system strikes me as singularly optimistic.
  - bE9a3S5So8igd3 6y ago
    > half of the population (the people with power) directly benefits from an unjust system... Fix what? Slavery (including the enslavement of whites) is not legal, at least not in the US. Everything is de-segregated and we have laws to protect certain classes of minorities. Beyond legalities I see black-promotion constantly in media. Everything looks perfectly fine from my perspective (I could do without the propaganda though). As a reminder our last president was (half) black. You're imagining that the US is not beneficial historically to everyone. There's a reason people from Europe, Asia, latin america, etc. immigrated to America. They didn't come because "America is only benefits white slave-owners!" The entire point of the "american dream" is that people without power can find a way to prosper. Are we supposed to pretend none of that ever happened? So what is this injustice du jour that suddenly, over the last few weeks, has become so pressing? Policing? I don't think there's evidence to support that blacks are targetted by cops because they're black. Poor neighborhoods probably do require more policing than non-poor neighborhoods as, naturally, criminal activity is more prevalent amongst the poor. Relative to other minorities my understanding is that blacks are underperforming in various ways. Surely you can't be so easily deluded into believing statements like "our black kids are being killed by cops every minute!" More whites are killed by cops. Blacks are overrepresented in proportion to their population. That blacks are overrepresented in certain figures does not support a radical claim like "systemic racism," contrary to Twitter logic. Is it some other "injustice" you're so worked up about? Is it some imaginary injustice that is not even possible to resolve? Why don't you be specific about your radical claims; your statements are empty Twitter platitudes as far as I'm concerned. Frankly, I resent the implication that I, as a white, am somehow benefiting from "injustice."
    - zozbot234 6y ago
      The criminal justice system needs a lot of fixing. The rate of incarceration and criminalization is insane in a Western context, and does not actually help community safety. This is something that there's broad consensus about among social scientists.
aww_dang 6y ago
Objecting to racism isn't the same as toeing the BLM party line. The more extreme variants of the BLM movement are explicitly racist. The phrase "silence is violence" ignores this distinction. Partisans will accuse anyone who dissents of racism or self-hatred and internalized racism.
arp242 6y ago
I think the problem is that it's not really in the power of regular citizens to make meaningful changes to structural/institutional racism; these kind of changes have to happen at a different level (e.g. correcting the disadvantages socio-economic status would probably my #1 thing, although I'm not 100% sure how to do this). You can "not be silent" all you want, but if that doesn't change much then, it's kinda of ... pointless. "Looking the other way" in the face of blatant racism is of course bad and, IMHO, inexcusable, but it's usually a lot more subtle than this. Besides, that if speaking up may have real consequences for you? What if it risks alienating life-long friends, your job, your volunteer work? And will speaking up actually achieve anything? Also some people might choose to focus on different aspects of society to improve. A day has only 24 hours, and there are many possible topics you can fight for. Not everyone needs to fight for every cause.
- panarky 6y ago
  > it's kinda of ... pointless Change requires many people to stop accepting the status quo. And that requires broad awareness. Awareness requires people talking to other people.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - arp242 6y ago
    Yes, of course you can talk to people, but that's not what the parent commenter was suggesting, at least not in my reading of it.
trabant00 6y ago
Wow, you sure know a lot of what people actually think and what their motives really are, sometimes when those motives are unknown even to the people who have them.
disambiguation 6y ago
wouldn't a phrase like "silence is consent" or "silence enables racism" be more appropriate? the problem is, we have multiple parties that are at odds with one another, and there are only two ways to come to an agreement. Either both parties have good will and are willing to cooperate, or one party submits to the other. "Silence is violence" is telling me to submit, not cooperate, so why would i care to sink time into proving I'm a good person when the general attitude has no good will for my position? further, I'm also concerned that violence is generally reciprocated with more violence. This sentiment lays the groundwork to commit real violence against good people that are just trying to mind their own business.
AnimalMuppet 6y ago
I think a lot of the "words are violence" types are also trying to prove they are Good People, just with a different standard of what makes one "Good".
Ghjklov 6y ago
What's the plan? Do you start executing anyone who doesn't openly support your cause? I mean, their silence is violence right? It's justified if we kill them. Only by killing the racists and enablers of racism, can we tear down the old system and build a new one that is not racist. I think that's the right thing for you to do. Anything less must be perpetuating a systemically racist system, no?
sdinsn 6y ago
Being silent does not mean they "pretend to have no responsibility". Believe it or not, not everyone uses social media and broadcasts their opinion to the world. Believe it or not, not everyone has time to protest.

zozbot234 6y ago

If the actual issue is that the system is "structurally" racist, why do we even care about blaming people for their silence, or lack thereof? Isn't it a basic starting point of performing a proper "structural" or "root-cause" based analysis of a problematic system, that one should avoid preemptively assigning blame? You really can't have it both ways, this whole way of thinking makes zero sense.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
yoav 6y ago
It’s a system of people. So obviously the “root-cause analysis” would only happen if the problem wasn’t an accepted part of society. Why would anyone seek to solve a problem that no one cares about. If half of the population (the people with power) directly benefits from an unjust system, but says nothing about it, it will never be addressed. There is a conflict of interest. How can you benefit from an injustice, stay silent, and still just passively hope it will get fixed? Hundreds of years in isn’t proof enough that sitting around hoping someone else fixes it doesn’t work?
- zozbot234 6y ago
  Your view that a significant part of the population actually benefits from this system strikes me as singularly optimistic.
- bE9a3S5So8igd3 6y ago
  > half of the population (the people with power) directly benefits from an unjust system... Fix what? Slavery (including the enslavement of whites) is not legal, at least not in the US. Everything is de-segregated and we have laws to protect certain classes of minorities. Beyond legalities I see black-promotion constantly in media. Everything looks perfectly fine from my perspective (I could do without the propaganda though). As a reminder our last president was (half) black. You're imagining that the US is not beneficial historically to everyone. There's a reason people from Europe, Asia, latin america, etc. immigrated to America. They didn't come because "America is only benefits white slave-owners!" The entire point of the "american dream" is that people without power can find a way to prosper. Are we supposed to pretend none of that ever happened? So what is this injustice du jour that suddenly, over the last few weeks, has become so pressing? Policing? I don't think there's evidence to support that blacks are targetted by cops because they're black. Poor neighborhoods probably do require more policing than non-poor neighborhoods as, naturally, criminal activity is more prevalent amongst the poor. Relative to other minorities my understanding is that blacks are underperforming in various ways. Surely you can't be so easily deluded into believing statements like "our black kids are being killed by cops every minute!" More whites are killed by cops. Blacks are overrepresented in proportion to their population. That blacks are overrepresented in certain figures does not support a radical claim like "systemic racism," contrary to Twitter logic. Is it some other "injustice" you're so worked up about? Is it some imaginary injustice that is not even possible to resolve? Why don't you be specific about your radical claims; your statements are empty Twitter platitudes as far as I'm concerned. Frankly, I resent the implication that I, as a white, am somehow benefiting from "injustice."
  - zozbot234 6y ago
    The criminal justice system needs a lot of fixing. The rate of incarceration and criminalization is insane in a Western context, and does not actually help community safety. This is something that there's broad consensus about among social scientists.

aww_dang 6y ago

Objecting to racism isn't the same as toeing the BLM party line. The more extreme variants of the BLM movement are explicitly racist. The phrase "silence is violence" ignores this distinction. Partisans will accuse anyone who dissents of racism or self-hatred and internalized racism.

arp242 6y ago

I think the problem is that it's not really in the power of regular citizens to make meaningful changes to structural/institutional racism; these kind of changes have to happen at a different level (e.g. correcting the disadvantages socio-economic status would probably my #1 thing, although I'm not 100% sure how to do this). You can "not be silent" all you want, but if that doesn't change much then, it's kinda of ... pointless. "Looking the other way" in the face of blatant racism is of course bad and, IMHO, inexcusable, but it's usually a lot more subtle than this. Besides, that if speaking up may have real consequences for you? What if it risks alienating life-long friends, your job, your volunteer work? And will speaking up actually achieve anything? Also some people might choose to focus on different aspects of society to improve. A day has only 24 hours, and there are many possible topics you can fight for. Not everyone needs to fight for every cause.

panarky 6y ago
> it's kinda of ... pointless Change requires many people to stop accepting the status quo. And that requires broad awareness. Awareness requires people talking to other people.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- arp242 6y ago
  Yes, of course you can talk to people, but that's not what the parent commenter was suggesting, at least not in my reading of it.

trabant00 6y ago

Wow, you sure know a lot of what people actually think and what their motives really are, sometimes when those motives are unknown even to the people who have them.

disambiguation 6y ago

wouldn't a phrase like "silence is consent" or "silence enables racism" be more appropriate? the problem is, we have multiple parties that are at odds with one another, and there are only two ways to come to an agreement. Either both parties have good will and are willing to cooperate, or one party submits to the other. "Silence is violence" is telling me to submit, not cooperate, so why would i care to sink time into proving I'm a good person when the general attitude has no good will for my position? further, I'm also concerned that violence is generally reciprocated with more violence. This sentiment lays the groundwork to commit real violence against good people that are just trying to mind their own business.

AnimalMuppet 6y ago

I think a lot of the "words are violence" types are also trying to prove they are Good People, just with a different standard of what makes one "Good".

Ghjklov 6y ago

What's the plan? Do you start executing anyone who doesn't openly support your cause? I mean, their silence is violence right? It's justified if we kill them. Only by killing the racists and enablers of racism, can we tear down the old system and build a new one that is not racist. I think that's the right thing for you to do. Anything less must be perpetuating a systemically racist system, no?

sdinsn 6y ago

Being silent does not mean they "pretend to have no responsibility". Believe it or not, not everyone uses social media and broadcasts their opinion to the world. Believe it or not, not everyone has time to protest.