Here I will delve into the arguments made in White Fragility and identify the elements that I found problematic. The first chapter sets the tone of the book, which is largely condescending. DiAngelo poses,
“How can I say that if you are white, your opinions on racism are most likely ignorant, when I don’t even know you? I can say so because nothing in mainstream US culture gives us the information we need to have the nuanced understanding of arguably the most complex and enduring social dynamic of the last several hundred years.” (p. 8)
Although one might not understand all of the nuances of race relations, each individual has had a unique set of experiences and can give valuable insight and perspective. Perhaps a white person does not fully understand what it is like to be a black person in America, but conversely, a black person does not fully understand what it is like to be a white person in America. It is impossible to have a genuine conversation on race relations and make progress in society when the opinions of an entire race of people are dismissed as “ignorant.” The author proceeds to anticipate accusations that she might be generalizing and not accounting for individual struggles as a “common reflex” that she has witnessed (p. 12). In this way, she creates a red herring and pathologizes the arguments against her, implying that they come from a place of emotional insecurity rather than directly addressing the problematic practice of making such generalizations. While it is at times useful to generalize, in this case the generalizations manifest as unnecessarily confrontational encounters described throughout the book. The condescension continues as the author implores the white reader who believes they are different from other white people to take a deep breath, reread the challenge questions she wrote, and “work through them” (p. 14), once again implying that disagreements and counternarratives must be arising from excess emotionality.
Merriam-Webster defines racism as “a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.” As such, “racist” has become one of the worst accusations to make of a white person, conveying that one is intolerant of those who are different. The author redefines this emotionally charged term and in fact distinguishes it from prejudice. She defines racism as “a system [which] occurs when a racial group’s prejudice is backed by legal authority and institutional control” (p. 21). By this definition, only white people in the United States can be racist, as “only whites have the collective social and institutional power and privilege over people of color. People of color do not have this power and privilege over white people” (p. 22). Furthermore, she seems to define all white people as racist to some degree, as “a racism free upbringing is not possible” (p. 83). This bold, progressive act of redefinition begs the question: Why? Why not invent a new term, rather than unnecessarily create confusion and guilt? She even states “To be less white is to be less racially oppressive [....] To be less white is to be open to, interested in, and compassionate toward the racial realities of people of color” (150), thus defining a skin color with negative qualities. Further confusion over definitions is brewed when she asserts that we live in a culture of white supremacy and states,
“White supremacy is more than the idea that whites are superior to people of color; it is the deeper premise that supports this idea - the definition of whites as the norm or standard for human, and people of color as a deviation from that norm” (p. 33).
This is somewhat of a non sequitur, as the author seems to equate racial superiority with norms. It is expected for society to have a norm that represents the majority of the population, but this by no means implies racial superiority. She later muses, “Think about how often white people mention the race of a person if they are not white” (p. 56), but once again this is simply a matter of norms, and a relative non-issue is transformed into a manifestation of racism. In Chinese literature, one would not expect a character to be described as Chinese, but if he/she is white or black or otherwise different from the norm, this would be more likely to be included in the description.
DiAngelo describes a hypothetical scenario where a white child in a store points out that a man’s skin is black, and the mother immediately tries to quiet the child out of embarrassment (p. 37). She is quick to assume that this implies that there is something shameful about being black, rather than the more compelling explanation that the mother is terrified of being called the worst term in society: a racist. She acknowledges the overall sentiment of the mother that “we should not talk openly about race” (p. 37), yet she does not acknowledge how this could relate to her own admission earlier that white people are ignorant about race, or to her dismissal of white people’s opinions on race.
In the culture war against racism, there is an undue emphasis placed on rhetoric. Merely using terms such as “urban, underprivileged, diverse, sketchy, and good neighborhoods” is described as “enact[ing] racism while maintaining a positive self-image” (p. 43). She proceeds to describe how people make associations between black people and poor, crime-filled neighborhoods, in spite of her own description of statistics on the wealth gap between white and black communities. While she indicates that this pattern recognition is a form of racism, at no point in the book does she have a thoughtful discussion on the economic solutions that allow society to break the pattern itself. Pattern recognition is how human beings navigate the world and should not be at the forefront of the discussion when alarming patterns develop within society. Furthermore, terms such as “underprivileged” are depicted in the book as a sort of code word for “black,” when in reality these are the more accurate and salient terms that directly identify the underlying problem of unjust distribution of wealth.
Written by Ramya. Artwork by Dhanya.
Comentários