5 ms·

Then, with respect, you are not listening to and understanding the people to the left of you. They deny that there is a mere undercurrent of latent intentional

by Digory 6y ago

Then, with respect, you are not listening to and understanding the people to the left of you. They deny that there is a mere undercurrent of latent intentional bigotry by those in power (racism). Rather, they affirm that America is a system of power and social relations that keep the underclass just as effectively subjugated as slavery, without the need for intentional bigotry. And they intend to undo it. George Washington is not being removed from school names because there is a tail problem with bigotry that we’ve made progress on. They believe they must deny Washington any place of honor, so that BIPOC children feel safe enough to succeed. Of course we have not “solved racism.” But it is not a straw man to point out the false religion of the iconoclasts claiming to have a solution.

lisper 6y ago
Reference(s)?
- manfredo 6y ago
  The article in question provides several examples of public figures making these points. I've personally encountered people and organizations that . Several who, for instance, decried white flight on one hand but on the other hand criticized whites (and Asians) moving into poor neighborhoods in San Francisco. One company I worked at set up a system of reserving headcount specifically for underrepresented demographics, while simultaneously declared that any notion that the company extended preferential treatment to said groups was hateful and not acceptable. I think these people are well-intentioned but are too scared to confront controversy or navigate nuance in their views. So they resort to this sort of contradiction to try and avoid it.
- omginternets 6y ago
  I don't see the point. You're already ignoring the ones FTA.
  - lisper 6y ago
    There are two references in the TFA. Both of them are books. I haven't read them, so I will concede that these two books endorse the point of view being described. However, McWhorter makes the claim that third-wave racism is mainstream. The existence of two books endorsing a point of view is not evidence that this point of view is mainstream, or even widespread. If it were, then flat-eartherism would be mainstream.
    - omginternets 6y ago
      >I haven't read them, so I will concede that these two books endorse the point of view being described. Better yet, read them! They answer your question. >The existence of two books endorsing a point of view is not evidence that this point of view is mainstream. Since "mainstream" is a judgement call, I don't think anyone can directly demonstrate that to your liking. If you're genuinely curious about this subject, this would be a good time to do some reading.
      - lisper 6y ago
        > Better yet, read them! They answer your question. What question is that? I don't see how reading these books could possibly persuade me of anything other than there are two people who espouse some overly extreme ideas with regards to racism. And I will happily concede that without reading them. So I was wrong when I said that "absolutely no one" believes this crap. Two people believe it. Maybe even 100. Maybe even 1000. But McWhorter claims that third-wave anti-racism is mainstream (his word) and so far I have seen zero evidence of that.
        omginternets 6y ago
        >But McWhorter claims that third-wave anti-racism is mainstream (his word) and so far I have seen zero evidence of that. Read the damn books if you actually care.
        dang 6y ago
        Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar. There's no information here, just a swipe. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
- Digory 6y ago
  To which proposition?
  - lisper 6y ago
    That third-wave racism is mainstream. That there are large numbers of people who subscribe to the ten points that McWhorter lists.
    - Digory 6y ago
      Which of the ten are not mainstream? Surely you agree some are held by significant numbers of people. Take his #3 for example. You haven’t heard people claiming “Silence is violence?” While decrying the Karens’ inability to just listen?
      - lisper 6y ago
        > You’d deny there are a significant number of people who believe three, for example? "Silence about racism is violence." Yes, I am highly skeptical that a significant number of people profess to believe this. It sounds like clear hyperbole to me.
        Digory 6y ago
        Teen Vogue: https://www.teenvogue.com/story/non-black-people-speak-up-for-black-lives-op-ed https://www.teenvogue.com/story/non-black-people-speak-up-fo... CBS News: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/white-silence-on-social-media-why-not-saying-anything-is-actually-saying-a-lot/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/white-silence-on-social-media-w... Houston Chronicle: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/life/article/Speaking-up-against-racism-speaks-volumes-15319893.php https://www.houstonchronicle.com/life/article/Speaking-up-ag... Here is the Google scholar search, to show that the phrase is widespread, and not particularly used as hyperbole among scholars. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=“silence+is+violence”&btnG= https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=“silence+is+viole... So, beauty magazines, mainstream press, and the academy. What part of that is not widespread? Ed: more, since this was only 1 for 4, in your mind. College administrators: https://www.naspa.org/blog/silence-is-violence-why-using-our-voice-matters https://www.naspa.org/blog/silence-is-violence-why-using-our... Hockey players. https://www.theplayerstribune.com/articles/mark-fraser-racism-george-floyd-hockey-nhl https://www.theplayerstribune.com/articles/mark-fraser-racis... Twin Cities teenagers, inspired by BLM protests: https://www.twincities.com/2020/07/22/roseville-teens-keep-making-black-lives-matters-signs-despite-thefts-vandalism/ https://www.twincities.com/2020/07/22/roseville-teens-keep-m... The editor of Governing Magazine. https://www.governing.com/now/A-Shattered-Complacency-When-Silence-Equals-Violence.html https://www.governing.com/now/A-Shattered-Complacency-When-S... Sophie Turner, as seen in the Daily Mail. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-8395851/Pregnant-Sophie-Turner-says-White-Silence-Violence-BLM-protest-Joe-Jonas.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-8395851/Pregna... What, exactly, is your quantum of proof here?
dragonwriter 6y ago
> Then, with respect, you are not listening to and understanding the people to the left of you Yeah, no, as someone fairly far to the left on race issues, I'm going to agree that lisper is right and McWhorter is a strawman-beating hack selling the kind of pro-elite concern-trolling progressives-are-ruining-progressivism narrative that's always been a lazy but effective way to make money as a commentator in the establishment media. > George Washington is not being removed from school names because there is a tail problem with bigotry that we’ve made progress on Yes, he is. > They believe they must deny Washington any place of honor, so that BIPOC children feel safe enough to succeed. These aren't different things. The reason why honoring Washington ha become seen as a barrier to further progress and an impediment to feelings of safety is precisely because of the manner in which reverence for the founders and the conditions established at the founding, including Washington, has been integrated into a deeply racist quasi-religious civic cult model of what America means, largely in direct response to and as a tool to impede further progress on racial equality. EDIT: Personally, I like the kind of positive adaptive syncretism represented by things like Hamilton better than destructive iconoclasm as a response to this, but that doesn't stop me from understanding where it comes from. > But it is not a straw man to point out the false religion of the iconoclasts claiming to have a solution. It is when both the religion and the claim to have a solution is something you've just completely invented out of whole cloth. The modern antiracist movement, like the antifascist movement, and like Jeffersonian antityranny denies (or at least, does not hold out for) a solution, but instead posits that the problem it addresses can only, at least as best as we can tell right now, be held in check by eternal, and adaptive, vigilance.
- Digory 6y ago
  >reverence for the founders and the conditions established at the founding, including Washington, has been integrated into a deeply racist quasi-religious civic cult model of what America means, largely in direct response to and as a tool to impede further progress on racial equality. I think this fairly makes my point. The left-left doesn't think of a few "leftovers of racism" as much as "eternal and adaptive vigilance" against a "deeply racist quasi-religious civic cult" of American meaning that identifies with the founders.

by Digory 6y ago

lisper 6y ago

Reference(s)?

manfredo 6y ago
The article in question provides several examples of public figures making these points. I've personally encountered people and organizations that . Several who, for instance, decried white flight on one hand but on the other hand criticized whites (and Asians) moving into poor neighborhoods in San Francisco. One company I worked at set up a system of reserving headcount specifically for underrepresented demographics, while simultaneously declared that any notion that the company extended preferential treatment to said groups was hateful and not acceptable. I think these people are well-intentioned but are too scared to confront controversy or navigate nuance in their views. So they resort to this sort of contradiction to try and avoid it.
omginternets 6y ago
I don't see the point. You're already ignoring the ones FTA.
- lisper 6y ago
  There are two references in the TFA. Both of them are books. I haven't read them, so I will concede that these two books endorse the point of view being described. However, McWhorter makes the claim that third-wave racism is mainstream. The existence of two books endorsing a point of view is not evidence that this point of view is mainstream, or even widespread. If it were, then flat-eartherism would be mainstream.
  - omginternets 6y ago
    >I haven't read them, so I will concede that these two books endorse the point of view being described. Better yet, read them! They answer your question. >The existence of two books endorsing a point of view is not evidence that this point of view is mainstream. Since "mainstream" is a judgement call, I don't think anyone can directly demonstrate that to your liking. If you're genuinely curious about this subject, this would be a good time to do some reading.
    - lisper 6y ago
      > Better yet, read them! They answer your question. What question is that? I don't see how reading these books could possibly persuade me of anything other than there are two people who espouse some overly extreme ideas with regards to racism. And I will happily concede that without reading them. So I was wrong when I said that "absolutely no one" believes this crap. Two people believe it. Maybe even 100. Maybe even 1000. But McWhorter claims that third-wave anti-racism is mainstream (his word) and so far I have seen zero evidence of that.
      - omginternets 6y ago
        >But McWhorter claims that third-wave anti-racism is mainstream (his word) and so far I have seen zero evidence of that. Read the damn books if you actually care.
        dang 6y ago
        Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar. There's no information here, just a swipe. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
Digory 6y ago
To which proposition?
- lisper 6y ago
  That third-wave racism is mainstream. That there are large numbers of people who subscribe to the ten points that McWhorter lists.
  - Digory 6y ago
    Which of the ten are not mainstream? Surely you agree some are held by significant numbers of people. Take his #3 for example. You haven’t heard people claiming “Silence is violence?” While decrying the Karens’ inability to just listen?
    - lisper 6y ago
      > You’d deny there are a significant number of people who believe three, for example? "Silence about racism is violence." Yes, I am highly skeptical that a significant number of people profess to believe this. It sounds like clear hyperbole to me.
      - Digory 6y ago
        Teen Vogue: https://www.teenvogue.com/story/non-black-people-speak-up-for-black-lives-op-ed https://www.teenvogue.com/story/non-black-people-speak-up-fo... CBS News: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/white-silence-on-social-media-why-not-saying-anything-is-actually-saying-a-lot/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/white-silence-on-social-media-w... Houston Chronicle: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/life/article/Speaking-up-against-racism-speaks-volumes-15319893.php https://www.houstonchronicle.com/life/article/Speaking-up-ag... Here is the Google scholar search, to show that the phrase is widespread, and not particularly used as hyperbole among scholars. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=“silence+is+violence”&btnG= https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=“silence+is+viole... So, beauty magazines, mainstream press, and the academy. What part of that is not widespread? Ed: more, since this was only 1 for 4, in your mind. College administrators: https://www.naspa.org/blog/silence-is-violence-why-using-our-voice-matters https://www.naspa.org/blog/silence-is-violence-why-using-our... Hockey players. https://www.theplayerstribune.com/articles/mark-fraser-racism-george-floyd-hockey-nhl https://www.theplayerstribune.com/articles/mark-fraser-racis... Twin Cities teenagers, inspired by BLM protests: https://www.twincities.com/2020/07/22/roseville-teens-keep-making-black-lives-matters-signs-despite-thefts-vandalism/ https://www.twincities.com/2020/07/22/roseville-teens-keep-m... The editor of Governing Magazine. https://www.governing.com/now/A-Shattered-Complacency-When-Silence-Equals-Violence.html https://www.governing.com/now/A-Shattered-Complacency-When-S... Sophie Turner, as seen in the Daily Mail. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-8395851/Pregnant-Sophie-Turner-says-White-Silence-Violence-BLM-protest-Joe-Jonas.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-8395851/Pregna... What, exactly, is your quantum of proof here?

dragonwriter 6y ago

> Then, with respect, you are not listening to and understanding the people to the left of you Yeah, no, as someone fairly far to the left on race issues, I'm going to agree that lisper is right and McWhorter is a strawman-beating hack selling the kind of pro-elite concern-trolling progressives-are-ruining-progressivism narrative that's always been a lazy but effective way to make money as a commentator in the establishment media. > George Washington is not being removed from school names because there is a tail problem with bigotry that we’ve made progress on Yes, he is. > They believe they must deny Washington any place of honor, so that BIPOC children feel safe enough to succeed. These aren't different things. The reason why honoring Washington ha become seen as a barrier to further progress and an impediment to feelings of safety is precisely because of the manner in which reverence for the founders and the conditions established at the founding, including Washington, has been integrated into a deeply racist quasi-religious civic cult model of what America means, largely in direct response to and as a tool to impede further progress on racial equality. EDIT: Personally, I like the kind of positive adaptive syncretism represented by things like Hamilton better than destructive iconoclasm as a response to this, but that doesn't stop me from understanding where it comes from. > But it is not a straw man to point out the false religion of the iconoclasts claiming to have a solution. It is when both the religion and the claim to have a solution is something you've just completely invented out of whole cloth. The modern antiracist movement, like the antifascist movement, and like Jeffersonian antityranny denies (or at least, does not hold out for) a solution, but instead posits that the problem it addresses can only, at least as best as we can tell right now, be held in check by eternal, and adaptive, vigilance.

Digory 6y ago
>reverence for the founders and the conditions established at the founding, including Washington, has been integrated into a deeply racist quasi-religious civic cult model of what America means, largely in direct response to and as a tool to impede further progress on racial equality. I think this fairly makes my point. The left-left doesn't think of a few "leftovers of racism" as much as "eternal and adaptive vigilance" against a "deeply racist quasi-religious civic cult" of American meaning that identifies with the founders.