…someone who understood what i was trying to say, omfg
and also like… do people know what to Google? I do, but that’s because I’ve already been in SJ circles
I mean, like, I haven’t actually Googled “things that offend POC” (and wouldn’t) but I can easily imagine that it, or queries like it, might return exactly the sorts of result SJ types would not want un-woke-yet wypipo reading.
So it’s… my problem is it seems so much like advice from inside the circle. And… dude, we have a country to save. We need to be talking to people outside the circle, getting them to come in. And that means not setting up barriers like “don’t talk to me unless you are THIS woke”
Yeah, googling can produce some seriously bad results from time to time - like, right now, typing “did holocaust happen” into Google actually gives me a page titled … “Top 10 reasons why the holocaust didn’t happen” as its #1 search result … wtf.
SPLC did some time ago post a piece ( https://www.splcenter.org/20170118/google-and-miseducation-dylann-roof ) arguing that this sort of terrible google results to unfortunately-formulated queries was actually an important part of what got someone like racist mass murderer Dylann Roof drawn into violent white supremacism in the first place.
Which makes it … kinda odd to see that flippant “google it” type responses without any specifics (like, say, search phrases or date ranges or similar) are apparently still a thing.
This!
I wanted to say that too but I didn’t have the evidence ready to hand. Thank you!
I had a discussion with someone who, it turns out, was using “Whiteness” to mean “White supremacy” which last time I checked they maintained should have been understood effortlessly by others to mean that. It’s three pages into the Google results with “Whiteness definition Sociology” before that meaning is mentioned.
A link to eg. that Everyday Feminism or Ta-Nehisi Coates article that explains whatever is WAY more helpful and less likely to send an already irritated and uninformed person into the hands of people who violently disagree with Social Justice.
That, yes.
Honestly I really don’t like these weird… expanded definitions of “white supremacy” much either. I mean, I think it’s worthwhile to mention that white people who fancy ourselves nice and nonoppressive can hold views that are actually grounded in some weird racist shit.
But if whiteness itself is “white supremacy,” how the hell do we accurately describe what happened in Charlottesville, or the ideology those people openly endorsed?
> Everyday Feminism or Ta-Nehisi Coates
Not sure if that’s even productive. Maybe Bannon was right, and the whiteness=white-supremacist identity politics equivocation will make white people vote for white identitarians because there is no escape anyway.
EF feels like a parody of itself.
I am leery of any sentence that begins “Maybe Bannon was right,” but I honestly do think that the tendency to label oneself based on groups has become incredibly intense these days, and I’m not surprised to see white supremacists saying “this is about my white identity” these days.
What’s that saying? “The Devil can quote Scripture for his purposes?”
When Bannon called that professor on the phone, he said that identity politics will turn white people into white nationalists faster than it turns out PoC to vote Democrat.
We can model ethnopol as having two aspects - attack, or as basis for resource extraction, and defense, as basis to prevent outsider resource extraction. The formation of ethnic identity can be reinforced by either, and potentially reinforces both. So I agree - going heavy on idpol risks reawakening white racial consciousness in a defense framing (even if one thinks that isn’t morally valid/permissible), which can then be shifted to an attack framing, which is bad, because of reasons already expressed at length by many people.