George Ciccariello–Maher and Drexel University

[jpx7]

While my economic proclivities lean decidedly left, I've been pretty clear on here many, many times that I am very wary of over-policing speech-acts and other forms of not-physically-injurious expression, especially on university campuses. Many (though by no means all) of the right-leaning posters here have claimed, in recent years, that such policing is exclusively the purview and pursuit of "liberals" or "the left" (which are not, as I've belabored, really synonymous—but, as Horsie used to say, I digress...). While I've always rejected the notion that any corner of the ideological spectrum has a monopoly on reactionary outrage, I also wondered if the sense that "liberals want to control speech" (and its unvoiced correlative: "... and conservatives don't") was as much as the product of the current institutional political regime as anything else. With that regime set to transition to a very different one, at least in terms of rhetoric and optics, I will be interested to see which groups seem to be struggling most "to control speech."

To wit, yesterday saw the very same sort of reactionary silencing from conservatives that I've been told is the stock-in-trade of their liberal counterparts, when a Drexel University professor satirically tweeted about the (mythical, shadowy) concept of "White Genocide"; the right-leaning backlash was so strong that the University publicly censured him. While Professor Ciccariello–Maher is tenured, and thus his rights of expression are inscribed in his employment agreement, this sort of reaction from the University—as Ciccariello–Maher notes—sets a constricting precedent, especially with regard to non-tenured faculty.

So my question to our resident thought-police police is: This is bad too, right? The slippery-slope ethics of silencing don't suddenly straighten out when you dislike the person or ideas being silenced, right? I know I'd be alarmed if my alma mater cancelled an appearance by, say, Paul Wolfowitz*, just because of student-pressure; his ideas are bad, but he deserves a space to share them, just as students deserve to hear those ideas, and likewise deserve (especially in an environment explicitly committed to learning-objectives) the challenge of cultivating critiques and rebukes to bad (as well as good-but-not-great) ideas.

*(My alma mater wouldn't—their record is actually quite good on this issue, plus Wolfowitz is an alumnus.)

 

[BedellBrave]

Yes, it is bad. We, I think, find ourselves in a new era when social media swarms are proving a bit too powerful for my taste and tend to be knee-jerk. With social media booing and rotten egg throwing gets kicked up a notch or two.

 

[zitothebrave]

I whole heartedly disagree with the Professor here, and thinks what he says reeks of white-privilege (I don't know anyone who's experienced genocide who'd wish it on someone else) but I found the conservative backlash to be humorous. Akin to the backlash on the MTV thing.

 

[weso1]

I agree with jpx, not necessarily about this particular issue because I don't know enough about it, but his overall point. Censorship isn't a left/right thing and changes in time. Right now the social justice warriors are the new Victorians as one media personality I listen to it likes to put it. But certainly there are plenty of instances where the right has been obnoxious when it comes to censorship.

A couple of things that I'll add is that part of a professor's job evaluation is going to be based on his or her speech. Also, I think these grumps from the right are more of a reaction to the censorship practices of the regressive left. I think it's more of a protest then a desire to censor some random professor.

 

[weso1]

I whole heartedly disagree with the Professor here, and thinks what he says reeks of white-privilege (I don't know anyone who's experienced genocide who'd wish it on someone else) but I found the conservative backlash to be humorous. Akin to the backlash on the MTV thing.

As someone who thinks the idea of white privilege is at best greatly overstated, I loved the MTV backlash and thought it was completely deserved. Especially since it is propaganda specifically aimed at young people.

 

[jpx7]

I whole heartedly disagree with the Professor here, and thinks what he says reeks of white-privilege (I don't know anyone who's experienced genocide who'd wish it on someone else) but I found the conservative backlash to be humorous. Akin to the backlash on the MTV thing.

Guess you didn't look into the reference, but he's alluding to the far-right concept of "White Genocide", which argues that multiculturalism, miscegenation, and shadowy Protocols of Elders of Zion-style forces are colluding to slowly "destroy" the "white race" through race-mixing and the acceptance/appreciation of the cultures of others. So—at least according to him, and most people familiar with his twitter-feed and academic work—when he said, "All I want for Christmas is White Genocide," he meant, "All I want for Christmas is for this idea—that society is becoming more tolerant, at the expense of the white hegemony—to actually be real [but it isn't]".

 

[zitothebrave]

Guess you didn't look into the reference, but he's alluding to the far-right concept of "White Genocide", which argues that multiculturalism, miscegenation, and shadowy Protocols of Elders of Zion-style forces are colluding to slowly "destroy" the "white race" through race-mixing and the acceptance/appreciation of the cultures of others. So—at least according to him, and most people familiar with his twitter-feed and academic work—when he said, "All I want for Christmas is White Genocide," he meant, "All I want for Christmas is for this idea—that society is becoming more tolerant, at the expense of the white hegemony—to actually be real [but it isn't]".

I worded what I meant to say poorly. Where I meant to go was to say no one who experienced genocide would wish it on anyone or joke about it. I vaguely knew a little about the race mixing thing. But it's still a sore spot for me. Mainly because I've heard genocide thrown around willy nilly and it's a classic example of devaluing a powerful word by associating it with something else. I scolded my Girlfriend's brother for saying the US was committing genocides all over the world when told him he needs to look up what a genocide is and if we were doing it, we were doing the worst possible job at it, and considering our very successful history of doing it to the indigenous people of this nation, I highly doubt we're doing it now. Even a teeny-tiny bit.

Sorry for my ill worded response. I'm a bit tired of dealing with members of the alt-right that I feel like the second they get on their stupid high horse something new dumb will happen.

 

[BedellBrave]

I worded what I meant to say poorly. Where I meant to go was to say no one who experienced genocide would wish it on anyone or joke about it. I vaguely knew a little about the race mixing thing. But it's still a sore spot for me. Mainly because I've heard genocide thrown around willy nilly and it's a classic example of devaluing a powerful word by associating it with something else. I scolded my Girlfriend's brother for saying the US was committing genocides all over the world when told him he needs to look up what a genocide is and if we were doing it, we were doing the worst possible job at it, and considering our very successful history of doing it to the indigenous people of this nation, I highly doubt we're doing it now. Even a teeny-tiny bit.

Sorry for my ill worded response. I'm a bit tired of dealing with members of the alt-right that I feel like the second they get on their stupid high horse something new dumb will happen.

Z, you make a very good point. The professor's tweet, no matter his intent, wasn't wise.

 

[zitothebrave]

As someone who thinks the idea of white privilege is at best greatly overstated, I loved the MTV backlash and thought it was completely deserved. Especially since it is propaganda specifically aimed at young people.

White privilege absolutely exists. I've seen it in my life. The more than a few times that I've dealt with cops I never was in fear of being arrested. Including the times me and my friend were doing things that may have resulted in not an arrest but in certainly being taken home to my parents. Like the time he ran to hide an airsoft rifle (his parents knew about it) cop just said be careful and don't act like you have a weapon. As we've seen happen in America, black kids have been shot for carrying toy guns, something I used to do all the time was fire cap guns. Even did some dumb stuff with that which could have gotten me in trouble but never did. I also when I was a bit older got the cops called on my friend and I for hitting golf balls at the baseball field. Mind you we've done this many times, but this time the cops were called on us by some local narc who thought we were trying to hit cars. Mind you we weren't, neither of us wanted the beating our parents would have given us if we had and we never hit a golf ball when there was even a chance of hitting a car. Anyway this narc told on us and the cop basically gave us a verbal warning.

Again, no fear from me of being arrested, and I know plenty of other people who don't share that. For me the only time I'm "afraid" of cops is driving because I'm almost always doing something that could get me a ticket.

 

[weso1]

White privilege absolutely exists. I've seen it in my life. The more than a few times that I've dealt with cops I never was in fear of being arrested. Including the times me and my friend were doing things that may have resulted in not an arrest but in certainly being taken home to my parents. Like the time he ran to hide an airsoft rifle (his parents knew about it) cop just said be careful and don't act like you have a weapon. As we've seen happen in America, black kids have been shot for carrying toy guns, something I used to do all the time was fire cap guns. Even did some dumb stuff with that which could have gotten me in trouble but never did. I also when I was a bit older got the cops called on my friend and I for hitting golf balls at the baseball field. Mind you we've done this many times, but this time the cops were called on us by some local narc who thought we were trying to hit cars. Mind you we weren't, neither of us wanted the beating our parents would have given us if we had and we never hit a golf ball when there was even a chance of hitting a car. Anyway this narc told on us and the cop basically gave us a verbal warning.

Again, no fear from me of being arrested, and I know plenty of other people who don't share that. For me the only time I'm "afraid" of cops is driving because I'm almost always doing something that could get me a ticket.

I definitely think profiling exists. But it exists based on evidence and it's not necessarily a bad thing. I sympathize with the idea that it can be annoying. So, I agree that the lack of white profiling is a white privilege, but there are black privileges as well. Affirmative action, college admissions, etc. are privileges afforded to black people. So, if we're just talking strictly about racial privilege then I think it's basically balanced. Let me put it this way, if you are an upper middle class black kid in a suburban neighborhood with two parents and in a good school system then imo, you are in a better position than a white kid in the same situation. Neil Degrasse Tyson was born with a lot more privilege than I was.

The biggest problem I have with the white privilege concept, is that its most ardent promoters tend to lump a bunch of other privileges into the white privilege concept. I think these have to be separated out. And if you do that then white privilege is way down the list of importance. Health, 2 loving parents, intelligence, wealth, education, safety, etc. are all significantly more important privileges than race. No matter what color a person is, if they don't have these privileges then it's going to be difficult to succeed. The reason it's important to separate racial privilege from the other privileges I mention is because its these privileges that are most important for personal success. White privilege is mostly just a tool that is used to help create a victim class.

 

[zitothebrave]

But it's not. When you talk about affirmative action and college admissions, typically you're just hiring/letting in qualified people and they save some money. Most people in the system of the ****ty inner city school system don't get out.

 

[weso1]

But it's not. When you talk about affirmative action and college admissions, typically you're just hiring/letting in qualified people and they save some money. Most people in the system of the ****ty inner city school system don't get out.

My point is that no matter the color of ones skin it's much more difficult to succeed for anyone who grows up in poverty with bad parenting. Tons of white people suffer due to the same lack of privilege that a disproportionate number of black people grow up with. So instead of concentrating policy on the racial component, we should concentrate policy on the other demographic and economic privileges. The enemy of success for black people is not whiteness. It's the lack of the many privileges that I listed in my earlier post.

 

[zitothebrave]

My point is that no matter the color of ones skin it's much more difficult to succeed for anyone who grows up in poverty with bad parenting. Tons of white people suffer due to the same lack of privilege that a disproportionate number of black people grow up with. So instead of concentrating policy on the racial component, we should concentrate policy on the other demographic and economic privileges. The enemy of success for black people is not whiteness. It's the lack of the many privileges that I listed in my earlier post.

Correct, but it's a lot easier for white people to climb a rung than black people. For example I already have earned more in my first 10 years out of high school (adjusted for inflation) than either of my parents out of college. ANd they worked a heck of a lot more hours than I did. Their parents came from severe working class backgrounds (though my mom's parents retired pretty well thanks to him owning a ton of land in NJ that he sold for a tidy sum) my Dad's parents weren't very literate and if you heard them talk they sounded like stereotypical 1930s townies. Not to put them down, but that's where they grew into life. But they worked hard and had an easier life than their parents, my parents had an easier life than them, and so far us kids have an "better" life than my parents.

And being white is certainly a factor. As is where they lived and so on so forth. What happened to a lot of black families is they moved to cities, especially in the north, for jobs, those jobs moved out and left the people there. With no jobs they started finding other ways to live. Getting out of that city is tough as it's very hard to relocate to somewhere totally new when you don't come from at least some means.

So while that generally proves you to be true, it also proves me to be correct. Being white has made things easier. I know people who have no business holding down a job but because they're white, they keep getting shots that one former colleague of mine who was a great employee who made one work related mistake cannot get.

 

[jpx7]

Also, concepts like "white privilege" are as much about acknowledging historical realities as they are about active contemporary forces. Too many white people knee-jerk at the term because it feels accusatory, but raising the issue of privileges (white or otherwise) is not, essentially, about saying, "You did this to me," but simply saying, "Because of a pernicious history, arbitrary elements of my person leave me systemically worse-off, or at least start me further behind the eight-ball."

 

[weso1]

Also, concepts like "white privilege" are as much about acknowledging historical realities as they are about active contemporary forces. Too many white people knee-jerk at the term because it feels accusatory, but raising the issue of privileges (white or otherwise) is not, essentially, about saying, "You did this to me," but simply saying, "Because of a pernicious history, arbitrary elements of my person leave me systemically worse-off, or at least start me further behind the eight-ball."

In the academic world you may be correct, but in the real world that is total bull****. Either way it's irrelevant. The question we should be asking is what's the best way to solve issues in black communities going forward? The answer is not about capitulating to victimization mentality.

 

[jpx7]

In the academic world you may be correct, but in the real world that is total bull****.

Demonstrate how what I said is "total bull**** [...]" in the "real" world.

Either way it's irrelevant. The question we should be asking is what's the best way to solve issues in black communities going forward? The answer is not about capitulating to victimization mentality.

It's entirely not irrelevant, precisely for the reason you suggest in your next sentence. Context is tremendously important to posing the right questions, and conceiving the best answers; acknowledging historical realities is very much not "about capitulating to victimization mentality." Likewise, one can acknowledge victimhood without suggesting or promoting surrender.

 

[weso1]

In the real world white privilege is more about what I discussed earlier in the thread. That whites are advantaged by modern day systems. When it's discussed on social media, news media, entertainment, etc. this is what people mean when they say "white privilege". Look at the recent mtv video, riots, black lives matter, etc. White privilege as defined by being behind the eight ball is something discussed mainly in the academic world.

It's been 150 years since slavery ended and 50 years since Jim Crow was overturned and the war on poverty began. Since that time tens of trillions of dollars have been spent to fight poverty, much of that money has gone to poor black Americans. Can we truly say that black people should still be behind the 8 ball? Is it truly relevant today that black Americans were behind the 8 ball 50 years ago? I'm not sure if that's the case. Either way it's extremely difficult to quantify, and I'm not convinced it's actually important to quantify going forward. Also, I find it a bit naive to think that one who acknowledges victimhood isn't more likely to surrender. Again this reeks of academia and I'm just not convinced it's applicable to actual society. In fact I do believe studies have shown that victimization mentality does help lead to a poverty cycle.

A new hypothesis I've come up with recently is that I believe black americans are no longer victims of the effects of white privilege, but are now victims of the effects of socialism.

 

[57Brave]

Can we truly say that black people should still be behind the 8 ball? Is it truly relevant today that black Americans were behind the 8 ball 50 years ago? I'm not sure if that's the case. Either way it's extremely difficult to quantify,

and I'm not convinced it's actually important to quantify going forward. Also, I find it a bit naive to think that one who acknowledges victimhood isn't more likely to surrender. Again this reeks of academia and I'm just not convinced it's applicable to actual society. In fact I do believe studies have shown that victimization mentality does help lead to a poverty cycle.

A new hypothesis I've come up with recently is that I believe black americans are no longer victims of the effects of white privilege, but are now victims of the effects of socialism.

actually it is easy to quantify.

Look to voter ID laws and districts where Voter suppression is the rage.

Is it just a coincidence that AA's are more often than not the target of these un democratic policies?

I for one would label that white privilege.

The privilege to not be hassled out of your vote

and this

from twitter:

LOLGOP ‏@LOLGOP 14m

14 minutes ago



Congratulations to everyone who had "one" for "How many black presidents would it take to get the GOP to side with Russia?"

 

[weso1]

What are the numbers on that? Reports I've read show that maybe a handful of seats in the house have been due to gerrymandering. Seems like most black communities are led by black or democratic leaders.

I've read multiple studies that state voter id laws have no effect on elections, unless that election was fraudulently won.

Either way, I don't see how that is a white privilige. Both races are negatively impacted by gerrymandering.

 

[57Brave]

help yourself

https://www.google.com/search?q=dis...+african+americans+voter+id&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8