Yelling ‘I hate white people’ and punching one isn’t a hate crime, Canadian judge rules

[Belk]

Walk on eggshells you say?

There are people out there protesting against their college for "safe spaces"...places literally made up of eggshells.

There are people out there advocating for some practice of asking people their preferred gender before referring to them...god forbid you be wrong about that.

There are people who equate "microaggressions" with "violence" and anything to do with our institutions as "racism" and "white supremacy"...

So...yeah...it goes both ways doesn't it? Do words matter or don't they?

There are people who take things to far. Do you agree with those people? If not I fail to see what relevance it has in this instance.

 

[Belk]

But again, this is the same logic being used against the Muslim ban that people are expected to swallow.

Why does the same alleged social dynamic magically stop applying to white people?

That is a fair point. The idea that banning Muslims is used as a recruitment tool can be seen as a parallel. Personally I have not used that point since my objection to the ban is much more what it says about us. Do you agree that we should not ban Muslims because it is a recruitment tool?

 

[Gadarene]

Let me reply with the well known witty rejoinder.... Huh?

It's not difficult.

There is basically no middle ground for whiteness in between "we're holding you collectively responsible for some of your ancestors being white supremacists" and "hey, let's just be white supremacists".

Other articles go into this idea in more detail - I think this piece needs to be the manifesto for the next four years as regards the dialogue on inequality: We need a 'PC' that includes white people (Opinion) - CNN.com

it can be hard to be white under this analysis......one likely tires of being endlessly assailed as complicit in sin.....White people feel like they aren't bad people, and are sick of being told that they are, no matter what they do. The idea that they are bearers of a "white privilege" for which they must endlessly apologize, no matter what they do or think, likely rankles especially. They feel damned if they do, damned if they don't.

"Good, that's the way they should feel!" many will insist, white as well as black. But here is where November 8th comes in. There is so often a difference between what should be and what is, or ever will be.
Namely, some whites are so resistant to conceiving of themselves as defined by bigotry that they are sticking up a middle finger at the whole business and cherishing their "white identity."

While the slide towards white nationalism is ugly, it makes sense to me that it is happening. White nationalism is a vision of whiteness that isn't relentlessly negative. The reason why this is plausible to me is because I've observed the same dynamic in play in the gender sphere (sorry to harp on about gender again, but a lot of the lessons in that arena are transferable). In short, constantly crapping on men and their issues, and pretending that they don't need to be talked about - that's the perfect opportunity for a group that *is* willing to talk about men's issues, even if they are a problem group themselves.

To paraphrase one of my favourite articles, which I can't link because swears:

"But when you deny everything and abuse anyone who brings the issue up, you cede the discussion to others who sometimes do bring it up. And then you have no right to be surprised if all of the most frequently offered answers are super toxic."

The solution here? Permit a positive space for whiteness that isn't simply defined on fixing the problems their ancestors caused. Collective guilt is toxic, whether it's some old goon complaining that the neighbourhood went downhill after them blacks moved in, or whether it's blaming whites entire for the actions of a few and imposing the original sin-like concept of white privilege on them. That the consequences to those mindsets differ is irrelevant - people usually compare these things based on similarity in what they are in essence. If collective guilting of nonwhite people is bad, then it must be unacceptable to do the same to white people.

 

[Gadarene]

That is a fair point. The idea that banning Muslims is used as a recruitment tool can be seen as a parallel. Personally I have not used that point since my objection to the ban is much more what it says about us. Do you agree that we should not ban Muslims because it is a recruitment tool?

Obviously. That's one of many reasons why it's a dumb idea.

 

[Gadarene]

There are people who take things to far. Do you agree with those people? If not I fail to see what relevance it has in this instance.

That we tolerate walking on eggshells when it comes to every other group except white people.

Many white people, understandably, take exception to this.

 

[Ana the Ist]

There are people who take things to far. Do you agree with those people? If not I fail to see what relevance it has in this instance.

Sure...there are people who "take things too far".

 

[Belk]

It's not difficult.

There is basically no middle ground for whiteness in between "we're holding you collectively responsible for some of your ancestors being white supremacists" and "hey, let's just be white supremacists".

Other articles go into this idea in more detail - I think this piece needs to be the manifesto for the next four years as regards the dialogue on inequality: We need a 'PC' that includes white people (Opinion) - CNN.com



While the slide towards white nationalism is ugly, it makes sense to me that it is happening. White nationalism is a vision of whiteness that isn't relentlessly negative. The reason why this is plausible to me is because I've observed the same dynamic in play in the gender sphere (sorry to harp on about gender again, but a lot of the lessons in that arena are transferable). In short, constantly crapping on men and their issues, and pretending that they don't need to be talked about - that's the perfect opportunity for a group that *is* willing to talk about men's issues, even if they are a problem group themselves.

To paraphrase one of my favourite articles, which I can't link because swears:

"But when you deny everything and abuse anyone who brings the issue up, you cede the discussion to others who sometimes do bring it up. And then you have no right to be surprised if all of the most frequently offered answers are super toxic."

The solution here? Permit a positive space for whiteness that isn't simply defined on fixing the problems their ancestors caused. Collective guilt is toxic, whether it's some old goon complaining that the neighbourhood went downhill after them blacks moved in, or whether it's blaming whites entire for the actions of a few and imposing the original sin-like concept of white privilege on them. That the consequences to those mindsets differ is irrelevant - people usually compare these things based on similarity in what they are in essence. If collective guilting of nonwhite people is bad, then it must be unacceptable to do the same to white people.

Apparently my experiences are very different from yours. I have never had any feelings of guilt for being white nor have I seen anyone demand that I feel such. I also do not feel guilt for being heterosexual even though I know being homosexual is a much tougher row to hoe. I have seen the data behind the idea of white privilege and it seemed pretty conclusive to me. Would you feel as negatively about the idea of white privilege if you did not feel that you were being castigated? How do you think we can re-frame this discussion so that it was more inclusive and did not paint whites as being bad people simply for their skin color?

 

[Belk]

That we tolerate walking on eggshells when it comes to every other group except white people.

Many white people, understandably, take exception to this.

Are not the majority of the people who are calling for safe spaces and denouncing "Micro aggression" white? In any case I hear that you feel castigated and I hear that a fair amount. It sounds from what you are saying that it is about the perception of not being treated equally that you take issue with?

 

[Gadarene]

Apparently my experiences are very different from yours. I have never had any feelings of guilt for being white nor have I seen anyone demand that I feel such.

Perhaps guilt is the wrong way of putting it. I think whites are however blamed collectively in a fashion that is considered unacceptable when directed at nonwhites. Actually, let's be more accurate here - collective blame of any nonwhite group for anything is generally considered unacceptable.

I don't think the observation re. white culture being seen as a negative is particularly unreasonable - anything labelled "white culture" is automatically treated with fear and suspicision, similar to how the notion of "white history month" isn't just seen as wrong-headed, it's basically seen as proof positive that you're a massive bigot, rather than simply just mistaken. Where are the positives of white history spoken of explicitly as white history? I do however notice that people are perfectly happy to attribute things like slavery and colonialism to the notion of white history.

I think this is what's causing people to "[stick] up a middle finger at the whole business and [cherish] their "white identity", as mentioned in the CNN McWhorter piece. I don't personally think embracing white nationalism is a good idea, possibly because while I can see the hypocrisies endemic to the contemporary discussion of racial inequality, it is not so important to me that I would risk sinking the whole country for it. I don't personally think whiteness, or indeed any race, is something to feel pride over. But what does grate for me is the rank hypocrisy. If collective blame is bad when done to nonwhites, then we need to stop doing it to whites as well - and those sorts of concepts like white privilege are collective blame.

I absolutely get the temptation to think "well, these equality types don't actually seem to mean what they say as they've double standards everywhere - screw it, let's vote for someone who isn't crapping on the groups I'm part of". If I was struggling more, or I had had worse experiences of being dismissed using this rhetoric, or my sense of race meant a lot more to me than it does, I could easily have ended up being lured into supporting Trump.

I have seen the data behind the idea of white privilege and it seemed pretty conclusive to me.

I'm not saying white advantage doesn't exist, the problem is it being assumed to apply to all white people in some way, and they must constantly be checking their privilege in order to atone for it.

This is the same manipulation that Christianity makes. "You're flawed because we say you are, but do exactly what we tell you and....well, you'll still be flawed. You can keep on doing what we tell you to do, of course."

It was old then, and it's no less old when race activists do it. It's not about equality or tolerance, it is sheer naked powermongering.

Would you feel as negatively about the idea of white privilege if you did not feel that you were being castigated? How do you think we can re-frame this discussion so that it was more inclusive and did not paint whites as being bad people simply for their skin color?

Don't personalise it. E.g. if someone disagrees with a particular bit of racial equality orthodoxy, don't presume that they must be privileged, for example, certainly not if all else you know about them is their race. One person's actions are not systems of oppression, so individualised callouts aren't really going to do anything other than raise hackles, particularly if they are based on presumption.

You said "data" earlier re. white privilege, but this is not a data-driven conversation based on reason and rationalism. The current conservation - if you can call it that - is preaching from a bully pulpit.

 

[Gadarene]

Are not the majority of the people who are calling for safe spaces and denouncing "Micro aggression" white?

Some are, but I think what might be of greater importance is which groups are the safe spaces etc supposed to protect. It is usually for the benefit of minorities.

In any case I hear that you feel castigated and I hear that a fair amount. It sounds from what you are saying that it is about the perception of not being treated equally that you take issue with?

Well, it isn't a perception. Collective blame is placed on white people by people who claim to want racial equality, all the time. This to me is no different in principle to treating all black people with suspicion simply because there exist some black criminals.

I absolutely get that there will be important differences in degree, and the latter I would consider more of a problem. But it hacks me off that the former isn't considered a problem at all, given that they are the same attitude in principle.

 

[rambot]

That we tolerate walking on eggshells when it comes to every other group except white people.

Many white people, understandably, take exception to this.

Yeah, and that's so weird.

Because I don't "walk on eggshells" around anyone. My basic philosophy is be kind and respectful to everyone, then you don't have to worry about offending people. If you look at people as individuals that you can be nice to instead of a member of a group that you HAVE to be nice to and be dilligent in not offending, perhaps you'd be less worried about offending people.

 

[rambot]

ps...
Gaderene, I don't want to get too involved since you are going on with Belk but out of curiousity:

Well, it isn't a perception. Collective blame is placed on white people by people who claim to want racial equality, all the time.

While you suggest it is "collective blame", is it possible that instead of "blame" what they are looking for is an acknowledgement that their group has special struggles and they would like that to be acknowledged?

I have never felt like black people have come to me and blamed me personally for slavery. And in terms of my Canadian experience, I have never had a First Nations person come directly up to me and say that I am to blame for residential schools and the genocide (though I'm sure there are a VERY few people who would do that, I don't assume every First Nation's person would do that or thinks it). That said, it has been CLEARLY shown to me that they want it acknowledged as a painful time in their culture's history and repression and that it continues to impact many of them.

 

[Gadarene]

Yeah, and that's so weird.

Because I don't "walk on eggshells" around anyone. My basic philosophy is be kind and respectful to everyone, then you don't have to worry about offending people. If you look at people as individuals that you can be nice to instead of a member of a group that you HAVE to be nice to and be dilligent in not offending, perhaps you'd be less worried about offending people.

I am not looking at them that way. I am pointing out that that is what is demanded for other races, while few are concerned about being similarly nice to whites.

 

[Gadarene]

ps...
Gaderene, I don't want to get too involved since you are going on with Belk but out of curiousity:

While you suggest it is "collective blame", is it possible that instead of "blame" what they are looking for is an acknowledgement that their group has special struggles and they would like that to be acknowledged?

I have never felt like black people have come to me and blamed me personally for slavery. And in terms of my Canadian experience, I have never had a First Nations person come directly up to me and say that I am to blame for residential schools and the genocide (though I'm sure there are a VERY few people who would do that, I don't assume every First Nation's person would do that or thinks it). That said, it has been CLEARLY shown to me that they want it acknowledged as a painful time in their culture's history and repression and that it continues to impact many of them.

But who actually denies that? Virtually noone. What people are tired of is the use of past oppression to manipulate in the present. Read the CNN piece, it's a good step forward. The problem isn't lack of acknowledgement of past atrocity, it's the usage of that to pull the original sin nonsense on whites.

Show me I'm on the wrong track here - show me whiteness being discussed positively by race equality activists, rather than as a synonym for e.g. colonialism.

 

[Ana the Ist]

How do you think we can re-frame this discussion so that it was more inclusive and did not paint whites as being bad people simply for their skin color?

This is a fair question...

I'd say start by acknowledging that all kinds of biases exist...for example, there's a general bias in favor of women called the "women are wonderful effect".

"Women are wonderful" effect - Wikipedia

So if we're talking about biases...it would help if people realized there's hundreds of these biases and no real way to know which ones are being acted upon or not. Does the women are wonderful effect account for the reason we see more men in prison than women? No way to know. Does a bias in favor of whites account for the reason we see more blacks in prison? Again, no way to know. People can't be held accountable for acting upon subconscious biases they may or may not have.

With regards to white privilege as a generalized notion of "whites benefit from centuries of white oppression of minorities"...it may be true (in a generalistic sense) but isn't a reason to blame whites today for their position, nor is it reasonable to ask whites to atone for the crimes of past whites (whether that be reparations, or specific benefits being handed out to minorities). We don't hold people accountable for the crimes of their own families...let alone what some guy in their race did years ago...

So put in the light of reason...I don't see much point to bringing up "white privilege" in any conversation except to make excuses for the problems minorities face...which I don't think really helps them.

Perhaps you do though...maybe you do think it's a concept worthy of the repeated discussion it's had in the last four years? Maybe you've got a reason why?

 

[Ana the Ist]

ps...
Gaderene, I don't want to get too involved since you are going on with Belk but out of curiousity:

While you suggest it is "collective blame", is it possible that instead of "blame" what they are looking for is an acknowledgement that their group has special struggles and they would like that to be acknowledged?

It isn't just about acknowledgment though...it's a jumping off point for change. Whether it's through law, policy, or culture...whiteness is being blamed and attacked.

I have never felt like black people have come to me and blamed me personally for slavery. And in terms of my Canadian experience, I have never had a First Nations person come directly up to me and say that I am to blame for residential schools and the genocide (though I'm sure there are a VERY few people who would do that, I don't assume every First Nation's person would do that or thinks it). That said, it has been CLEARLY shown to me that they want it acknowledged as a painful time in their culture's history and repression and that it continues to impact many of them.

Do Canadians typically not acknowledge that?

 

[rambot]

Do Canadians typically not acknowledge that?

Honestly far too many people havent .
But the same could be daid of blacks in the states though

 

[Ana the Ist]

Honestly far too many people havent .
But the same could be daid of blacks in the states though

Let's imagine for one moment that the entire non-indigenous population of Canada acknowledged everything that has happened to the indigenous population....

What would happen? Would they stop seeking acknowledgment of the atrocities that happened?

 

[rambot]

I am not looking at them that way. I am pointing out that that is what is demanded for other races, while few are concerned about being similarly nice to whites.

It really seems to me that that is how you are looking at them.
My experience with other races is very different from yours. You would only have to walk on eggshells if what you say would cause offence or be awful or mean. I have neverfelt a need to walk on eggshells.

Let's imagine for one moment that the entire non-indigenous population of Canada acknowledged everything that has happened to the indigenous population....

What would happen? Would they stop seeking acknowledgment of the atrocities that happened?

if they are aknowledged yes. But that is a ridiculously impossible hypothetical.
But that doesnt cancel treaty expectations and how our govt has neglected its commitments.

That also doesnt mean that intergenerational violence is no longer relevant.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I'm guessing by your silence rambot...that you probably don't think they'd stop bringing it up. So what does that tell you about the whole "we'd just like you to acknowledge it" line? Do you really think the past gets brought up for acknowledgment?