
The Dehumanizing Condescension of White Fragility - Reedx
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/dehumanizing-condescension-white-fragility/614146/
======
mgamache
It's interesting this article is not treading higher on HN. With the general
rational / enlightenment perspective that HN has this should be a hot button.
The denial of rationality and logic as a way to know things is antithetical to
most of what gets posted here (and this view is gaining traction).

 _I was hoping for a strong defense (steelmanning) of the pro
intersectionality view._ When I don't see how anyone could believe the claims,
I question if I really understand the counter arguments.

~~~
richliss
John McWhorter is a great read and watch generally. Even if you don’t agree
with him it’s clear he’s a smart and well-read guy who you should respect.

His videos with Glenn Loury on The Glenn Show are great fun, smart and for me
what the mainstream media is generally missing (Neil DeGrasse Tyson being the
exception) in that these black academics are not solely defined by their race
and whilst not completely ignoring it they show their expertise as being their
thing and with that has come excellence in their field (and being interesting
thinkers outside of it). The media seems to love the “Hey you’re black so you
must want to talk about the black angle/aspect of this subject” even when
there is none and the black person almost certainly wants to bring their own
angle on the subject matter founded on years of study and experience.

Glenn also rips apart White Fragility and there’s a “soft racism of low
expectations” angle about DiAngelo that you can tell really frustrates Loury
and McWhorter. As an onlooker they are intellectual heavyweights in comparison
to DiAngelo so can imagine that they feel patronised.

------
laurex
What gets brought up in addressing the problems of White Fragility by this
writer are not the same objections I hear from white people, for the most
part. While the article's author has valid critiques, they are not "racism
doesn't exist" nor "we shouldn't be taking this time to better understand the
role of racism in our culture," nor "most white people are not fairly ignorant
when it comes to the role race plays in dealings with police, economic
position, or status in many industries including tech."

I would highly recommend doing additional reading that is less concerned with
"how white people should feel," and more related to the history and
construction of the idea of race in America. Fatal Invention, by Dorothy
Roberts, is a good look at the role of science, and the Warmth of Other Suns
is an interesting look at migration, for example.

------
mtgp1000
Isn't it ironically racist to assign negative properties ("white fragility"
and racism in particular) to an entire group of people based on their skin
color? Are we really just going to ignore that fact?

The treatment of racism in the book is tantamount to original sin (we are all
born as sinners:we are all born as racists [whites only]). This book [and the
affiliated movement] is laying the moral foundation for the oppression of
white people, who will soon be a majority minority - and already are a
minority globally.

What's worse, the very concept of "white fragility" is presented as a
Kafkaesque, unfalsifiable trap. If you dare defend yourself against
accusations of racism, well, we won't even address whether your argument is
legitimate, we just dismiss your concerns as a "fragile whiteness". Just like
the recent forced redefinition of racism (privilege+power), it is an
intellectually dishonest concept designed to begin any argument from a
position of advantage, not to actually communicate anything of substance.

If you replaced "white" with "black" or "Jewish" or any other race, this would
be a blatantly, undeniably offensive and hurtful text - yet not only do we
champion it, but it is being used effectively as a textbook for ramming
diversity and inclusion down an increasing number of throats. The fact that
this book is a best seller only proves that a growing faction in society has
completely gone off the deep end.

Why are we letting irrational, self hating ideologues influence our society to
this degree?

~~~
marklacey
I haven’t read White Fragility and couldn’t read the entirety of the article
linked here due to the paywall, so I cannot comment on those.

I have been trying to educate myself about the topic recently, though, and
would strongly recommend looking into some of the excellent work on systemic
racism in the US if you’re interested in learning more.

The documentary “13th” (available for free on YouTube at the moment), the 2nd
season of the podcast Scene On Radio (“Seeing White”), and the book How to Be
An Anti-Racist are three things I can recommend based on what I’ve read/heard
from them so far.

What you’re calling the “recent forced redefinition of racism” is not
especially recent. I first heard this argument around 30 years ago, and at the
time dismissed it, but now understand why people want to emphasize that over
the definition I recall learning as a child which was structured along the
lines of a belief in superiority of one group over another.

Having a belief may impact how you feel towards someone and how you act
towards them, and may even have an impact on that person if you are in a
position to influence the course of their life.

Having a system that is designed and reinforced to encourage disparate
outcomes is far more impactful to that group as a whole.

I’m not going to argue that both aren’t harmful, but I’ve certainly come
around to the conclusion that systematic or policy-based racism (if you’re
uncomfortable calling it racism, feel free to disregard the name and come up
with something you’re more comfortable with) has disproportionately affected
Black and non-black people of color in the US.

~~~
0xy
I would be willing to entertain the point that systematic racism exists if
universities had roughly equivalent admission rates for all races for
identical test scores, however black people tend to have significantly higher
rates of admission than white people, and very significantly higher rates than
Asian people.

If systemic racism exists in a specific direction as you imply, why do
institutions have their fingers on the scale in favor of the oppressed race?

In fact, if students were treated identically without the consideration of
race then black admission rates to universities would dramatically fall.

~~~
dragonwriter
> If systemic racism exists in a specific direction as you imply, why do
> institutions have their fingers on the scale in favor of the oppressed race?

You are literally asking “if systemic racism exists, why are specific
institutions taking specific steps to correct systemic racism”. Suggesting
that you think that _if anyone notices and attempts to address systemic
racism, then it must not exist_.

~~~
ThrowawayR2
So why aren't whites being disadvantaged more than Asians? Asians aren't at
fault for America's putative racism problems.

~~~
Chris2048
This would be v tribal thinking. (to generalise) white people are to blame for
racism, but whites university applicants are not to blame for racism.

This paradox arises from the nebulous grouping of "white people" to include
all whites, past and present, and ignoring any relevant differences or
disproportion of blame.

Hence, a white 18 year old somehow inherits crimes of the past committed by
white people in the past. That that white person may have entered the country
just a few years ago is not taken into account - It is assumed they receive
"white privilege" to amount that justifies any magnitude of countermeasure.

