"In this class, we will ask what an ethical white identity entails, what it means to be #woke, and consider the journal Race Traitor's motto, 'treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity"
Any professor teaching anti-(any other race'ness') would be instantly a pariah and unable to keep a job.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/23/health/college-course-white-co...
I have a question. When I grew up I heard 'colorblindness' was a good thing. What happened to that? It appears we are going in the opposite direction.
Whiteness isn't really a race, so that's not the same thing. In America, it's been a social construct whose members have shifted over the years.
> I have a question. When I grew up I heard 'colorblindness' was a good thing. What happened to that? It appears we are going in the opposite direction.
People started to realize that it ignores the lived experience of black people.
You got the answer yourself:
> I think you are saying that Whites do not constitute a race in the same way that Blacks do?? Does that make sense?
Culture is the issue. And by bypassing that and focusing on race it instantly makes the conversation taboo and kills any progress through conversation and public discourse.
This happens often in society and it's a shame, especially when cultural defects result in oppression or mass inter-community violence. These are serious problems that can't be addressed honestly.
where irish ever required to use 'colored' restrooms? did anti-miscegenation laws outlaw 'white and irish' marriage or sexual relations?
consider that 'paddy wagon' is a term from irish association with policework in the 1800s... does it seem likely that 'white' citizens of that time would be content with 'non-whites' arresting them and carting them off to jail or court?
You are free to disagree with the thesis, of course.
For one you cite a phenomenon that was unique to a certain time/place (the irish).
> The point is that whiteness in America isn't a race at all; it's a social construction
My objection is how this misses the forest for the trees. There's a weak correlation between some rednecks in appalachia who hate blacks and, say, the hiring behaviour of wealthy whites in business, or the politics driven out of middle-class America which push out ineffective criminal justice policy.
These need to be confronted on a culture-by-culture basis.
For example, just look at how so many people with honest concern about violence in ghettos often blame it on the black race, or because of the popularity of the former, non-racists who criticize it will get dismissed as merely being racists. But just because they are primarily black doesn't mean the problem is racial nor does it mean their race is entirely why they got into that position. There are plenty of non-black ghettos with high violence and low educations in many countries.
If you lump it all into a racial issue you will only get a huge push back as we see here in this thread. For good reasons too, it's as reductive and irrational as the racists or anti-semites.
You could get all social-science academia about it, but all cultures are partially social constructs. And pretending it's only a social construction is similarly reductive, there is more than enough resesrch on the genetic S culture.
So Whites select a social construct, while all others select a race? This is remarkably convoluted and confusing. Maybe I am just not smart enough to understand this.
I personally estimate that in 100 years Hispanics are going to be considered white as they lose their undesirable status, just like happened to the Irish.
Black people often don’t either, but are forced to based on skin color.
No, it's not.
> How does it ignore the experiences of 'black' people?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/26/do-not...
Colorblindness advocates that while you may subconsciously classify people into different groups, you shouldn't let that classification get in the way of evaluating a person as an individual.
The problem with tribalism is that it doesn't allow me, someone trying to view another as an individual, to do so. It asserts that we can only view each other as faceless expressions of 'our' groups. This is counterproductive and the essential problem with identity politics.
Wow, that escalated quickly.
> What are the merits of basing everyone by the hue of their pigmentation?
This is a strawman; it's not what I'm advocating. What I am advocating is to recognize that black people have a different lived experience than white people. Colorblindness erases that.
> Again, these ideas only serve to segrate groups and will likely lead to create civil strife.
Like racism isn't causing civil strife right now?
There are many problems in many communities (poor rural white, inner city black, etc.) that are caused by the actions of those in the communities themselves, rather than by oppressive outside forces. Attitude and behavioral change within those communities is necessary for any lasting improvement in the lived experience of it's members.