White Guilt
I have a column up at TCS about the new book, White Guilt, by Shelby Steele. Here is an excerpt:
Read the whole thing.
While listening to the radio recently, I heard the writer Christopher Hitchens' riveting description of Shelby Steele's new book White Guilt : How Blacks and Whites Together Destroyed the Promise of the Civil Rights Era.I promptly ordered it and have not been disappointed.
White Guilt is a powerful essay that (as George Will says in the cover blurb) "braids family memories with an acute understanding of national policies." Will says Steele "demonstrates what went wrong when whites for their reasons and blacks for theirs, embraced the idea that white guilt explains blacks' problems and can be the basis of polices for ameliorating them."
But what happens when our national policies are derived from white guilt and black anger rather than the universal principles that free societies aspire to -- freedom for the individual, rights for all individuals, equality under the law, equality of opportunity, and an inherent right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?"
Read the whole thing.
posted by Helen at 7:42 AM
32 Comments:
Excellent column. Steele has an opinion column in th WSJ the other day. His thoughts on white guilt are quite insightful into the workings of the liberal mind, even war has to be an act of social work.
One of the ironies of all this is that it is a racist stance in that the white man is seeing the black man as not being able to succeed or prosper without the white man's help. Of course, Democrats cultivate this feeling on the part of blacks to get their vote and the guilt ridden liberal whites get to feel magnanimous by giving away someone else's money.
I blogged about Steele's white guilt and related items the other day.
Dadvocate,
Thanks--I did read Steele's column and thought it was quite perceptive.
Dr, Helen, I think your article was well-written, and I also noticed from your biography that you have become an impressive internet multi-tasker. (Where do you find the time?) One of your quotes from Steele:
"Anger is acted out by the oppressed only when real weakness is perceived in the oppressor. Anger in the oppressed is a response to perceived opportunity, not to injustice."
not only pertains to racial issues but also reminds me of Western-Muslim relations and even the dynamic in some of our schools. Is it possible some white Westerners have become pathological, responding dysfunctionally to virtually everything rather than embracing a socially healthy response?
The more I think about this, the more I think the answer is obviously yes.
Rush had audio takes from Steele today on the radio at lunch. It's one of those concepts we all know, but are glad to hear it said out loud.
thanks
g
DRJ,
Glad you liked the article. In response to your question about Westerners becoming pathological and responding dysfunctionally, I think that it is the response to anger that is pathological.
If people threaten to become violent or are violent--our society seems to immediately become frightened and back down--that is, if they perceive that the person will carry through with the threat--they will give the person what they want. However, if a normal person becomes angry or upset--they just tighten the screws even more, since "good citizens" are the easiest to control, i.e. good citizens will listen, usually try to compromise etc. The pathological part is rewarding violent and pathological behavior. Bottom line is that people act in an angry manner when they know they can get away with it and if it can benefit them is some way. Apparently, if you act like a thug in our society, you are not held accountable and get your way. If you are an upstanding citizen who follows the rules, you are held to higher standards and are the guilty party. That said, the end result is that the responsible feel like saps and the angry and violent get away with anything.
Case in point: In several college school shootings (Appalachian Law School, Case Western Nursing School), the shooters acted outrageously and aggressively to the staff and students and got away with it until they ended up killing the very professors who helped them. Why? because the staff thought that if they just gave in time after time that the aggressive person would be satisfied. But lo and behold, the aggressor only wanted more goodies and when he didn't get them, he acted out violently.
20 odd years ago, in Dayton OH, I was waiting with my cousin at the bus stop in downtown about 10 PM. A man high on something came around the corner and walked up to one group of people after another, got literally in their faces and shouted something angry and unintelligible.
My cousin got frightened and when he moved towards us, she told me not to look at him. I kept looking at him, maintained eye contact, and when he saw that I was not backing down, he got literally nose to nose with me and yelled. I did not blink, did not flinch. He paused, got a baffled look on his face, took a few steps back, turned and walked rapidly away from the bus stop to a walkway between buildings. Just before he went down it, he turned, yelled and shook his fist.
Everyone at the bus stop moved away from us. My cousin lectured me on all the bad things that could have happened and how I was just antagonizing him and what would I have done if he had a gun, etc. I finally told her (1) nothing happened. (2) People backing down were encouraging him (3) If he had a weapon, he was close enough and high enough for me to take it away from him (4) If you do not stand up to the crazies, they get worse.
Oddly, while she continued to huff and fume, she was always willing to call me when she needed to go to the Blues bars and her boyfriend was working, because she felt safe with me.
drj and DrHelen,
Excellent points regarding pathological responses. I see this in so many areas of our government from gun control,immigration, racial issues, etc. The government and many "do-gooder" organizations comes down on the "normal" "good citizens" while constantly accepting inappropriate behavior on the part of "thug."
Anonymous 3:36:
Great story. I always laugh when the same people who are always telling me that guns are evil, fighting back is horrible and meeting violence with violence is always wrong are the same ones who have looked to me for help at certain times, e.g. the co-worker who asks me to wait around if they are working with an unstable client (Uhhh...what do they expect me to do if a client is violent--smile and extend my hand?) or walk with someone to their car--again, same thing, what is the purpose of having me go with them if they truly do not believe in fighting back?
"...the end result is that the responsible feel like saps and the angry and violent get away with anything."
It sucks but it's nothing new. Read Mau-Mauing the Flack Catchers by Tom Wolfe.
People do things for reasons, even when those reasons are irrational. White guilt pays off for the white people who indulge in it because it is a form of moral exhibitionism. Christianity is great, but when it goes bad, it goes very bad, and fetishing of victims and martyrs, and self-lacerating confessions are an example of dysfunctional, perverted Christianity.
And when Blacks turn white guilt to their advantage, it is just moral extortion. This is fairly common; it is often part of the dynamic of domestic violence, and the victims may be quite unaware of why they are reminaing in and thereby perpetuating their own victimization. They doi it because they love the thrill of being "morally superior" or because it gratifies some self-image as the "mater dolorosa" - back to distorted Christianity.
It's hard for me to feel guilty about being 'White' when my father is 'Black'.
So the long term solution to white guilt and black anger is more inter-marriage.
and regarding this bit from Dr. Helen, "what is the purpose of having me go with them if they truly do not believe in fighting back?"
Three reasons, firstly, safety in numbers, these folks believe that opportunists will see a number of people as being a less desirable target than a solo person, and secondly, the 'I don't need to be faster than the crocodile, just faster than the other guy' effect, if violence occurs, your 'friend' or co-worker will run hoping that you will run just a bit slower so that the victimizer chooses the easier victim, finally, they take their cues from Europe, talk peace, deride the use of force, but hope that someone else allied with them still believes in violence.
I would like to comment from a different perspective not being black nor white. Being Asian, I find it patronizing when dealing with white people and being asked where I learned how to speak English fluently. While dealing with some (but not all) black Americans, they tend to stick to stereotypes and give me a contemptous look as if we have denied them the opportunity to advance. I usually do not get the message directly but it shows in very subtle ways. Years ago, I was asked to submit a proposal for a major contract. The head of marketing asked me to emphasize my ethnic origins so as to gain an advantage as a minority. I refused to do so even if it meant scoring more points as I want to stand on my own merit and accomplishments. I have dealt with people of all races, religious backgrounds and never had any problem with them as they treat everyone with respect. It is only in this country where the emphasis is on a person's background and origin come into play. Consciously or sub-consciously race/ethnicity becomes a factor in any social interaction whether it is a business or social setting.
Jim wrote: "Christianity is great, but when it goes bad, it goes very bad, and fetishing of victims and martyrs, and self-lacerating confessions are an example of dysfunctional, perverted Christianity." Ain't that the truth! My family is Christian, and my daughter came home from school confused about how the Puritans, such "good Christians," acted like such assholes. (My word, not hers.) This lead to a great discussion about what makes a good Christian. Bottom line is that good Christians are good people who act out the love and kindness of the gospel. But my goodness, when Christians go bad, we are AWFUL. Honestly, we (Christians) need to do a better job in pointing out the Christians Gone Wild and smacking them down. In a loving fashion of course!
Trey
Beyond a doubt slavery was bad, but I just do not understand why a white American in 2006 has guilt feelings about it.
I suspect such a person has guilt feelings about something else, perhaps something more personal, and they are "adopting" slavery as their "cause" in order to make what would otherwise be a private issue into a public one.
Anonymous 12:00
Very good point. A lot of the discussion on race in America has been framed in Southern terms. You see this in the northern cities where historical baggage about the KKK is trotted out with regard to to tensions between black communities and ethnic whites. How much more ignorant, or more likely, simply dishonest, can you get than that?
I grew up and live on the West Coast. You see the same thing here. Even though the "racial situation" on here has been about pogroms and ethnic cleansing of Asian communities - and here I am thinking as much about the destruction Chinatowns around the turn of the century as much as about the Japanese internmment - but you still here have demagougues - "preachers" - posturing about the historic wrongs committed about blacks, that happened 3,000 miles away. When are those grits-eating Confederates going to shut up and become real Americans?
That leads me to Anonymous 4:37's irrtiation about being treated like some kind of foreigner. There have been Asians in California since the very first days of the Gold Rush, going on six and maybe seven generations now. (At one tiem 10% of the population was of Chinese descent.) When you hear that kind of crap from someone who eats grits and greens and barbecue and whatnot, obviously a recent immigrant himself - just kill it with stony silence. Confederates don't deserve even the courtesy of a slap-down when they question if someone else is an American. Lovely people, more than most, but that one area is off limits to them.
Dr Helen,
Life interrupted and it took me awhile to get back, but I want to thank you for your response and extended discussion on the pathology of anger. I find topics like this fascinating. I alternate between wishing I had studied this in college and being grateful that I didn't!
I call this white guilt not because it is a guilt of conscience but because people stigmatized with moral crimes--here racism and imperialism--lack moral authority and so act guiltily whether they feel guilt or not.
Anon. 12:00 - Shelby Steele's statement above from his WSJ column clarifies that, in his opinion, it's not about guilt "feelings" but lacking moral authority (or perceiveing a lack or moral authority) due to being stigmatized.
How long do we allow this stigma to be carried and used against us? No longer than now I say.
DRJ,
Be grateful that you didn't study the psychology of anger! In theory, reading or discussing angry people sounds interesting (like this discussion). But in actuality, dealing with angry people in person is emotionally draining, tiring, upsetting, and can cause a heart attack! I am kidding....sort of..maybe not about the emotionally draining and tiring part. I used to think I was up to the job but I find the fewer angry people (I mean really angry people, people who have fury to the point of dumping gasoline on others and burning them up in a fury)I am around, the better I feel.
Hey, what's wrong with grits and greens and barbecue? That's good eatin'.
I'm born and raised in the US to Indian parents, so I don't have a dog in this fight. South Asians are pretty much invisible unless you're a plagiarizing Harvard sophomore or work in a call center overseas.
I was only fooling - I love all that stuff, grits and barbecue too. It's just that it's, it's.... a litttle ...furrin'. Not like tamales.
South Asians are pretty much invisible since you are Caucasian. I have finally gotten over being startled to see South Asians referred to as Asians in British publications - I guess it is a matter of one's frame of reference.
BTW South Asians in the form of Pakistanis and Sikhs were represented in the initial development of California's Central Valley after the wet parts were drained and the dry parts irrigated, back in the teens and twenties.
Caucasian in the sense that my family's from North India so there's some Evil Whitey Invader blood in us from 600 years ago, yes. :)
Hey, does that mean that I'm eligible for reparations? Pay up!
In my possibly quixotic belief in the essential capacity of most people to think rationally, and overlook the results if necessary, I don't think there's a lot of white guilt.
I don't think anybody with an IQ of twelve feels guilty about something his ancestors did. Especially if his ancestors didn't do it.
I think the white guilt is a fake, an attempt to proclaim moral superiority. It's a put-on.
Nevertheless, it lends itself to being manipulated even farther than the "guilty" anticipated going.
Huh. Serves them right.
Anonymous 4:37 said:
"It is only in this country where the emphasis is on a person's background and origin come into play. Consciously or sub-consciously race/ethnicity becomes a factor in any social interaction whether it is a business or social setting."
This happens all over the world. There is no reason to think it is unique to the US.
A glaring example is the Indian caste system. In Rwanda Hutu slaughtered Tutsi. Germans slaughtered Jews. Turks slaughtered Armenians. Saudi Arabia has six million guest workers from foreign countries; each is on a different payroll. In Japan parents hire private detectives to determine if a prospective son or daughter-in-law has any Korean blood. England still has an aristocracy and caste system. Malays and Chinese struggle with each other in Malaysia.
It is the norm in the world, rather than the exception, to emphasize a person's background and origin.
Why didn't you capitalize "White."
You're supposed to capitalize?
Anjali,
Don't tell me you have succumbed to that evil and colonialist AIT! (Aryan Invasion Theory) No! Sanskrit arose in India only and only from Indian roots - Seriously though, even Tamils are pretty Caucasian.
Capitalization - no, don't caplitalize either white or black. That makes those words inot names for groups, and it bogus branding, especially for white people, who absolutley do not form one cohesive groups of any kind, whatever opportunistic race baiters would like us con us into.
So ... Why didn't you capitalize "white"?
"So ... Why didn't you capitalize "white"?
Alright. Fine.
WHITE. WHITE. WHITE.
Everybody happy now?
Let me get this straight. I'm not allowed to be ANGRY about racism and discrimination against African-Americans like myself in America? I shouldn't get UPSET about institutional racism in hiring, promotion, wages, law enforcement, housing, voting rights, and lending?
Unless, you're saying that only White Americans have the right to be angry and upset about injustice. Is that what you're saying? The Founding Fathers were "angry" about taxation without representation to the point that they started a WAR--killing people left and right. I wonder, Dr. Helen, how you would psyco-analyze Patrick Henry, for saying "Give me liberty, or give me death," when in truth, he was enjoying far more liberties in 1776, than an African-American man in 1963.
Of course, with the handsome flow of white think-tank money, I suppose Shelby Steele reserves the right to use "selective outrage."
--Cobra
Enjoyed a lot! roulette casino game fioricet Self donning rubber bondage bag Uncut gay sleaze Yeast infection impotence impotence all-health-4u.info Look super vision contact lenses adipex ionamin phentermine high speed internet access malpractice botox Circuit breakers program seniors video slots Danco faucets Costco vacations Hair loss vitamins niacin Vitamin b shots in tijuana for weight loss incorporate Chaps cargo pocket pants black cock asian ass
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
Post a Comment
<< Home