USA Political Discussion

I found Emmanuel Acho's YouTube channel and discovered he recently started a series called 'Uncomfortable Conversations with a Black Man'.

While he addresses white America, I think everybody can benefit from this. In his most recent episode, he welcomed Matthew McConaughey to talk about the unconscious biases white people experience, and asks some interesting questions that we can ask ourselves.

I highly encourage watching these videos and subscribing to his channel to support this. Below are his first two videos.





After having watched these, did you learn anything new? Have you discovered any personal biases you may be holding onto without realizing?

I listened to some of the Matthew Mcconaughey interview.

I think people from different groups trying to empathize with each other is very important.

I think it's good that groups of people are talking to each other too. We can't give up on talking about this stuff and just resort to more harmful modes of expression. So they're setting a good example engaging.

And I also love to see people making efforts like this, because I know their intentions are good. They're trying to make sure everyone is treated with dignity and that everyone has equal opportunities to live lives with dignity and freedom. The goals and intentions are good things.

But...

To be honest, I'm concerned that certain rhetoric used in examples of Critical Race Theory is divisive and unintentionally creates animosity and division in society. No one has to agree with me. But that's what I see happening out there.

As I was watching Mcconaughey talk, my first thought was: many people I know wouldn't agree that they have implicit bias that makes them fear black men more than others, as the host tells Mcconaughey that he MUST admit he feels.

Some might, in fact, feel that way, but despite being encouraged to admit it, would avoid doing so because doing so could likely get them "canceled" or fired. Some might feel that way, but be in denial of it. Some people just literally might not feel that way.

There are people like me, who, despite having a problem with the rhetoric, can understand the ideas behind the rhetoric, and see that some of the things Critical Race Theory proponents are TRYING to say is true and need to be fixed: the fact that European colonialism, slavery, segregation, and further hidden discrimination after segregation was ended had effects on Black Americans and Native Americans, some of which are still playing out.

Terminology we used to use like---the word "disadvantaged" to describe a group in such a situation--was not so divisive like the terms in use today. But today this movement uses terms like "white privilege" and "white fragility." Most of y'all are younger than me; maybe you all have a different take on these words or...feel they have a different connotation.

But from my point of view, the connotation of the terminology is problematic.

Another thing that occured to me while watching this video:

Someone in a very good economic position, like an A-list celebrity, might have an easy time being labeled with a word like "privileged." I think it's harder for many working-class, disabled, or unemployed people to feel comfortable being labeled with that term, even if they're white and would probably even agree that they experience some of the benefits that have resulted from European dominance over the last few centuries and colonialism (majority population status, educational benefits passed down from generation to generation, occasionally inherited property, etc).

But to call that "white privilege" is an unnecessarily divisive, accusatory way to draw attention to this real phenomenon. First, the word privilege evokes images of bratty frat boys blowing their parent's money on parties. It evokes images of snobby rich girls snubbing you in the hall of a private school. That's why I say it has a negative connotation.

Second, the phenomenon they're trying to describe isn't necessarily a "white" phenomenon, it would be more accurate to call it "majority" or "majority population" phenomenon.

Unjust exploitation of minority groups by majority groups is what we're talking about here. A particular example of that--the example that involves whites and blacks in Europe and the United States.

Another example is that the Hindi in India are the "privledged" caste, and the Muslims in the Ottoman empire were the "priviledged" group.

There are similar examples of exploitation of minority groups in both cases. And the injustice of the behavior of a majority group exploiting a minority group is what the Critical Race Theory proponents seem to be trying to describe when they use terms like "white privilege."

So I think if the terminology that people used was more accurate and less inflammatory, more people (in the majority group) wouldn't recoil from it and more could, perhaps, embrace it and see the actual message underneath.

Here's an article about the branding problem which I completely agree with:

Huffpost article

The concept of the term 'white privilege' being too abrasive and therefore blocking people from being receptive towards acknowledging it and working on dismantling privilege is a tiresome argument that many racist individuals have consistently brought up.

White privilege is not a concept of exploitation of minority groups. It's a tangible effect about how this society was built by white people, for white people, on the backs of BIPOC, and the inevitable outcome that white people will always have benefits BIPOC don't have. It's that none of our issues stem from being white.

Accurate terminology can be uncomfortable. It can be confrontational. But it's not BIPOC's job to manage and treat hurt feelings because we realize we unconsciously and unknowingly and unwantingly benefitted from systemic racism. This yet again puts the burden on BIPOC to coddle our feelings. To make sure that the injustices they face are not too hurtful and confrontational for us. White privilege is not an insult, or a slur, or a divisive term. It's a factual statement on the status quo. It's an accurate reflection of how skin color dictates your ability to live without specific problems related to risking your life because of the way you look on the outside.

It's supposed to be uncomfortable to realize that this is happening. You're supposed to be uncomfortable with the realization that people have died and are currently dying over nothing more than their skin color when you never had that problem.

To imply that white privilege is too hurtful a term to be able to gather support is really just an admission that it's real, and that people don't like having their bubble burst because now they can't escape the realities BIPOC face every day.

I experience white privilege, and I don't even live in the US. This doesn't imply anything negative about me as a person, it just states: I'm white, and none of my problems exist because of the color of my skin. People with a different skin color can't say this. And if that's too uncomfortable, I don't know how else to tell people to care about things that don't affect them directly.

My own initial reaction to this topic was anger when I first encountered it in college. I had quite a few "white fragility" style tantrums. I was highly resistant to accepting it.

But now I am very embarrassed at the way I resisted these hard truths. Dismantling unconscious bias is uncomfortable. It can make you feel shame and guilt and question your assumptions, even your strongly held core beliefs about yourself.

Having absorbed the lifetime of messages from society doesn't make you a bad person, however. It makes you human.

We are all called upon to sit with our own discomfort and do the slow, hard work of becoming more aware people, so we can do the work of becoming a more equitable society.

I must still be in "white fragility" mode like Kim was in college then, because this still sounds to me like an argument that means, "this group of people is uncomfortable, so we should also make that group of people uncomfortable," when, in my head, the goal should be that neither group is uncomfortable.

I just don't think the term "white privilege" makes people uncomfortable in that good way that you're describing. Only in a bad way.

You know what I do think makes people uncomfortable in that good way, though? Videos. Videos of things that go on and never get reported, like the video of George Floyd.

That woke a lot of people up.

It woke me up, to a degree. I already knew there was a problem, but that was just beyond.

I think people will either know what's going on, or they don't, and either be empathetic, or they won't. I think most people would be empathetic. But I don't see how the term "white privilege" would get them closer to that. Maybe I just don't get it. Obviously many people agree with you guys, so...

That's interesting, that you reacted that way in college. I appreciate the relating on that.

The term doesn't exist to make people uncomfortable. The term exists to describe a real phenomenon, so that it can be discussed and hopefully worked past. Lacking a term for something does not make it not exist, it only makes it more difficult to analyze, understand, and organize any effort to handle.

You are making a desperately false equivalency.

One group is "uncomfortable" because they are being murdered by police at a vastly disproportionate rate to the rest of the population. Because systems have been set up such that it is nearly impossible for young black men to stay out of jail. Because they are heavily discriminated against, both actively and passively. "Uncomfortable" is honestly a gross and minimizing term to use to describe the suffering BIPOC people are put through in the US.

The other group is uncomfortable - and yes, only uncomfortable - because they don't want to have to think about how awful that is and how it's been going on for generations.

Every time someone gives a name to this phenomenon, it's immediately labeled as confrontational, and derails the argument by once again centering white comfort as more important than BIPOC suffering.

It absolutely does not matter what we call it while white folks refuse to listen. That's what this is an example of.

I KNOW it feels shitty to confront. It is NOT possible to be a real ally without working through it.

On this side, I'm deeply embarrassed by my initial resistance. I no longer feel at all confronted - rather, I feel empowered to start actually helping.

Consider this: we spent several days discussing the comfort levels of white people rather than talking about the real problem: BIPOC getting murdered for existing.

That is the definition of white fragility, and that is exactly the kind of unintentional bias born out of white privilege.

After thinking on this some more, I wanted to add that I too resisted the label of white privilege. I didn't understand it well, I assumed that as someone who was dealing with poverty and disabilities that the word privilege meant I was labeled as a person free of burdens and problems, when I was fighting to survive. Part of this was my refusal to listen, and put my own selfish feelings aside for a moment.

I resisted and fought against many things I now changed my mind on: rape culture, white privilege, male privilege, lots of things where it felt like I was being personally attacked or seeing injustices. I realized that I grew up in a society that was -- partially at least -- designed for me. The more I thought about it, the more I understood that I had biases. I did see people who were different from me differently. Not because I chose to, but because I grew up in a society that othered these people and made people like me the default. I was friends with people who were nice to me, but used horrible racist slurs when talking about others, and I thought that because they were nice to me that they deserved a pass. Not because I endorsed their racism, but it didn't apply to me, so I didn't understand just how badly hurt these minorities were by what was being said. I was living an entirely different kind of life and didn't have first-hand experiences, and I used this as a measure of whether or not such terms as privilege were valid or not.

I am very ashamed of the person I used to be. I recognize that I didn't choose to be that person, I was raised to be that person and influenced by things in ways I couldn't see. I'm not directly responsible for the things I was taught, but I was responsible for how I chose to move forward in life once I learned about these things. I chose to ignore black people's voices when they said racism was systemic. I chose to ignore women's voices when they said rape culture was real. I chose to ignore trans and non-binary voices when they said my refusal to adhere to their pronouns and respect their identities was harmful. I deeply regret those choices and wish I could have let go of my ego's fragility sooner, because I inevitably hurt many people with my behavior.

We have to understand that we as white people normalize a lot of things that are not okay, simply because we don't live life as BIPOC do. We have to understand that this discussion is about how we can do better in spite of not living a life like that. We have to understand that we need to take minorities at their word when they say such and so happens, because we simply can't understand it as we don't live it, and that makes THEM the experts on the matter. We're so used to living in a world designed for us that it's difficult to want to incur change when it means we have to hold ourselves accountable for behaviors we were taught and influenced to harbor. Because at the end of the day, BIPOC can't make these changes. Only we can, because we hold the power that negatively affects them.

White privilege isn't inherently bad, in the sense that we can use it to level the playing field. As a white person, I can use my privilege to protect BIPOC. I can use my white privilege to pass the mic to BIPOC and elevate their voices. I can use my privilege to vote for politicians who have the best interest of BIPOC in mind. I can use my privilege to talk to other white people about their own.

My main goal is to get rid of white privilege; not by pretending it doesn't exist, but to ensure that equity is truly achieved and white privilege simply becomes irrelevant because it stops existing.