College Professor’s Presentation: Imagine a World WITHOUT WHITENESS

casper

The Living Force
History and humanities professor James Harrison gave a presentation entitled “Imagine A World Without Whiteness”.
video:
https://youtu.be/zZ01DWe5zCo

link:
http://www.progressivestoday.com/college-professors-presentation-imagine-world-without-whiteness-video/

Do you have privileges in your life?
 
Thanks for sharing Casper. :)
I really wish people in academia cared as much about psychopath and police privilege as they did about white privilege. It's not like those things are going to go away when the majority of whites are assimilated or economically equilibriated with the non-whites. Maybe there are a naturally larger number of psychopaths in white populations than in non-white, but I think that just further clarifies they are the chief problem. There's nothing about privilege re: whites than cannot be more intensely applied to psychopathy. They create a system that directly benefits them at the expense of those with conscience, and then blame empaths for all the problems this generates for those with conscience.
 
There does seem to be a link between privileged culture and psychopathy. There's a phenomenon in abusive / narcissistic families where children are pitted against one another where one is the 'golden child' and the other is the abused 'degenerate'. Support is provided by the 'good one' to the narcissistic parent so the abuse may continue. This is shown vividly in David Pelzer's heart-wrenching book, A Child Called It. I think we can apply this to the psychopathic control system where we see white 'culture' provided with these privileges that are designed to perpetuate the abuse of other members of society.
 
How did you stumble upon that casper?

It's a concept that is well known nowadays especially in the US. They talk about it a lot on the internet. Last I checked, on the 1 side you have a group saying it doesn't exist and on the other you have a group saying it does.

I think it objectively true (how could it not be given the overwhelming evidence). However, in empathising with the group that says it doesn't exist, I find the reasons to be

- it makes them feel helpless as individually the vast majority weren't the actual architects of the system and therefore have no power to change it.
- it's kind of racist (i.e. focussing on 'white people') and usually it gives rise to what is commonly referred to as 'white-guilt' which is a powerful negative concoction of emotions.
- they can't see it as well, they are immersed in it.

Ultimately though, the problem is more than just 'whiteness' in terms of a racial thing... the problem is privilege based on discrimination which is brought about due to the basic architectural design of a societal system (which either favours a certain race, gender, religious orientation etc). Privilege is linked to money & power ultimately and I hear it's intrinsic in the capitalistic structure that defines our world today.

Back to the topic of whiteness, I saw 2 movies over the last year on this subject which I thought good:

Dope: (spoiler: below is not a trailer but an actual scene)


Dear White People:

 
Yeah, he's reaching for psychopathy but not quite getting there.

Another way to look at it is that most all dominant concepts, ideas and assumptions are Eurocentric - that is, of European origin, or based on the assumption that 'the West' is 'the world'. This British academic has done a fantastic job exposing the underlying racist beliefs in a whole slew of big-name European philosophers and political theorists:

http://www.cambridge.org/ar/academic/subjects/politics-international-relations/international-relations-and-international-organisations/eurocentric-conception-world-politics-western-international-theory-17602010

John Hobson claims that throughout its history most international theory has been embedded within various forms of Eurocentrism. Rather than producing value-free and universalist theories of inter-state relations, international theory instead provides provincial analyses that celebrate and defend Western civilization as the subject of, and ideal normative referent in, world politics. Hobson also provides a sympathetic critique of Edward Said's conceptions of Eurocentrism and Orientalism, revealing how Eurocentrism takes different forms, which can be imperialist or anti-imperialist, and showing how these have played out in international theory since 1760. The book thus speaks to scholars of international relations and also to all those interested in understanding Eurocentrism in the disciplines of political science/political theory, political economy/international political economy, geography, cultural and literary studies, sociology and, not least, anthropology.

  • Provides a thorough history of the development of ideas in international relations over 250 years
  • A provocative argument that ideas in international relations are not objective and scientific, but assume the superiority of Western civilization
  • Contributes to debates about Edward Said's views on Orientalism across the humanities and social sciences
 
Frankly, I'm interested how this professor and people like him (not depending on color), passed the psycho tests that had to solve before employment in these and similar positions.
These are people who should teach our children!?
 
Honestly the whole social justice movement reeks of a psy-op to me.It's most ardent followers are violent,irrational,hypocritical and racist.''You're a white male'' is used as both an insult and a way to dismiss arguments.The movement as a whole,much like those who follow Trump are impossible to talk to and adhere to their ideology with religious fervor. Below I'll post some videos of what I'm referring to.But it seems that it's just another way to divide the people and ponerise them while spilling as much blood as possible.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKK4rUtKI_Q -- this is a video of a black supremacist with what appears to be a Stockholm syndrome struck victim.Just look at the way the white boy keeps looking at his ''leader'' for permission to speak.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDlQ4H0Kdg8 -- here's a white kid being assaulted for having dreadlocks


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RC-Cqkq6zWc -- Black Lives Matter activist says that white lives don't matter.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU3vcvGpALQ -- A clash of anti and pro Trump people gets unpleasant(surprise surprise).Whiteness is constantly brought up to negate arguments (towards the end of the video)

These are just a few examples of MANY,but it should be pretty obvious imo that social justice is just the flip side of trump's supporters. i.e. fascism under another name.
 
Here's a couple more :

http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/211330/california-grad-students-claim-correcting-their-daniel-greenfield -- correcting spelling is now racist

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/gap-pulls-ad-called-racist-apologizes-critics/story?id=38190519 -- one child leaning on another is racist

This is honestly crazy,it reminds me of one of George Carlin bits on language control,i think it was this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwMukKqx-Os
 
Not sure how you wound up here Hindsight Man, but you should prolly know that we're pretty far to the left on social issues.

Hindsight Man said:
_https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKK4rUtKI_Q

:lol: Very funny, and very true!

Hindsight Man said:
_https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDlQ4H0Kdg8

She has a point. And he wasn't "assaulted."

Hindsight Man said:
_https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RC-Cqkq6zWc

Urgh, I couldn't listen to much of that; very infantile.

Hindsight Man said:
_https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU3vcvGpALQ

She's right.

Hindsight Man said:
These are just a few examples of MANY,but it should be pretty obvious imo that social justice is just the flip side of trump's supporters. i.e. fascism under another name.

Hardly. Protest movements are certainly co-opted, subverted, driven off the rails and so on, but to equivocate the two is nonsense. BlackLivesMatter is not within shot of taking control of the US government and turning the country full-frontal fascist.

OccupyWallStreet, BlackLivesMatter, NuitDebout (in France), and so on are, first and foremost, symptoms of a society in upheaval. People's cries for help and/or recognition - for the most part - deserve our sympathetic ear, not to be spat on, as I'm sure the psycho-elites are only too happy to see happen.
 
As has been noted, it seems it's a particular group rather than a race, has been promoted and kept within the clique - predominantly the old white western aristocracy/pathocracy though.

In regards to whitenss and the UK:

Having grown up for a few years around areas with white working class kids, they imitate other cultures much more than their 'own'.

One issue was lack of employment led to families having to move away from each other; another is lack of employment lead to rampant familial issues. And i think the decimation of culture in general lead to the worship of capital over cultural practises which promoted cohesion.

And i've always considered that in order to become an empire and destroy other countries, you have to do it to your own first.

And kind of a side note, it was interesting to read that some of Appalachian music culture came from England, because there was nary a trace nor a hint, at least for me, growing up.

Anyway, it's tricky and i'm not sure the below has the whole story.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/04/the-problem-for-poor-white-kids-is-that-a-part-of-their-culture-has-been-destroyed?CMP=share_btn_fb said:
The problem for poor, white kids is that a part of their culture has been destroyed
Paul Mason

Thatcherism didn’t just crush the unions, it crushed a story – as the report that says working-class white children go backwards at school proves

Our culture was the one celebrated in Ken Loach movies … a scene from the film Kes. Photograph: Everett/Rex/Shutterstock

Contact author
@paulmasonnews

Monday 4 April 2016 19.13 BST
Last modified on Tuesday 12 April 2016 11.21 BST

Shares
40,786
Comments
2,466
Save for later

The report came couched in the usual language of inclusion, technocracy and “what works”. Disadvantaged children are doing so badly at school that only one in five hits an international benchmark designed by the authors.

But the headline grabber in the paper from the liberal thinktank CentreForum concerns ethnicity: the serial losers after 28 years of marketisation, testing, a centralised curriculum and decentralised control of schools are poor white kids.

“During the early years, white British pupils are among the highest achievers,” say the authors. “By the end of secondary school however, those white British pupils are overtaken by 10 other ethnic groups to just below average, when compared with other ethnicities.”

Let’s confront squarely what this means. If the country is populated with low-achieving, inarticulate white kids it is something that happens between the year they stop being toddlers and the year they start being Neets (Not in Education, Employment or Training).

So what is it? In short, it is their lives.

The detailed ethnic breakdown in the report makes for depressing reading. The worst performers are white Irish traveller children, then “white gypsy/Roma” children – both of which school fails by a long chalk. They are followed by mixed-race children with Caribbean backgrounds, then white British. These are the only groups who collectively go backwards in the two years researchers have been crunching the numbers. By contrast, black Caribbean, and white Irish children go forward a bit, and Chinese and Indian children a lot.

Though I regret the marketisation of education, the league tables and the testing, these cannot be the primary cause. It’s 30 years since I taught in the school system – at a high school and then a special unit for behaviourally disruptive teenagers in Leicestershire. So the only relevant first-hand knowledge I can bring to this debate is that the same problems were apparent then. By the late-1980s people from a white, working-class background already knew we had a problem. We had seen the film Kes, and chuckled at the poverty of aspiration we were all in the process of leaving behind.Our culture was the one celebrated in Ken Loach movies: politicised and articulate, wanting only libraries big enough to house the books we had to wait weeks for.

Then, as if by a 50-tonne steel press, we had Kes status imposed on us as a class.

My dad was one of those kids in the 1930s who would have failed any test designed by a liberal thinktank. He left school at 15. A lifetime of trade unionism, workplace discussion and self-education meant he could sight-read music, grapple with serious novels and sit though five hours of Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg.

I can still remember, in front of a coal fire and on a carpet with a stone floor beneath it, my dad drawing me a picture of Oxford and Cambridge, complete with rugby fields and laboratories, and trying to explain how I might make the choice between them. He’d never been to either city, but to an impressionable five-year-old, this was a profound message: education is the way out.

It was not always the case that ethnic-minority children did better than white English ones, but the reason why some of them do now is pretty obvious: their problem – racism – is defined; their language skills tend to be well-developed; their culture is one of aspiration; they have social and religious institutions that promote cohesion.

By contrast, the problem of poor white kids cannot be properly defined: not in the language of freemarket capitalism, at least. It has nothing to do with being “overtaken” – still less with any reverse discrimination against them.

It is simply that a specific part of their culture has been destroyed. A culture based on work, rising wages, strict unspoken rules against disorder, obligatory collaboration and mutual aid. It all had to go, and the means of destroying it was the long-term unemployment millions of people had to suffer in the 1980s.

Thatcherite culture celebrated the chancers and the semi-crooks: people who had been shunned in the solidaristic working-class towns became the economic heroes of the new model – the security-firm operators, the contract-cleaning slave drivers; the outright hoodlums operating in plain sight as the cops concentrated on breaking strikes.

We thought we could ride the punches. But the great discovery of the modern right was that you only have to do this once. Suppress paternalism and solidarity for one generation and you create multigenerational ignorance and poverty. Convert Labour to the idea that wealth will trickle down, and to attacks on the undeserving poor, and you remove the means even to acknowledge the problem, let alone solve it.

Thatcherism didn’t just crush unions: alone that would not have been enough to produce this spectacular mismatch between aspiration and delivery in the education system. It crushed a story.

And what the most successful Chinese, Indian and white Irish children probably have – although you would need more research than offered here to give this assertion rigour – is a clear and compelling story.

In my first week at university, myself and a few other working-class kids on our course were quizzed by our middle-class peers: “You must be exceptionally bright to get here, against these odds,” was the theme. We were incredulous. We had been headed for university since we picked up Ladybird books. Without solidarity and knowledge, we are just scum, is the lesson trade unionism and social democracy taught the working-class kids of the 1960s; and Methodism and Catholicism taught the same.

To put right the injustice revealed by the CentreForum report requires us to put aside racist fantasies about “preferential treatment” for ethnic minorities; if their kids are preferentially treated, it is by their parents and their communities – who arm them with narratives and skills for overcoming economic disadvantage.

If these metrics are right, the present school system is failing to boost social mobility among white working-class kids. But educational reforms alone will barely scratch the surface. We have to find a form of economics that – without nostalgia or racism – allows the working population to define, once again, its own values, its own aspirations, its own story.
 
Niall said:
Not sure how you wound up here Hindsight Man, but you should prolly know that we're pretty far to the left on social issues.

Yes I am aware,I just personally found these examples very unpleasant,perhaps someone here can provide me with a better perspective on things.However ''you're a white male therefore you don't know hardships'' is a presumptuous argument.
 
''She has a point. And he wasn't "assaulted."

And yeah it wasn't full on assault,but it was physical.And over what,a hairstyle?How is having dreadlocks worthy of being grabbed and yelled at in a corridor?
 
Hindsight Man said:
''She has a point. And he wasn't "assaulted."

And yeah it wasn't full on assault,but it was physical.And over what,a hairstyle?How is having dreadlocks worthy of being grabbed and yelled at in a corridor?

I'm not particularly impressed with either individual in the encounter. But as for cultural appropriation, dreadlocks are not unique to black culture; even Neanderthals and early Europeans had dreadlocks until straighter hair became the norm. If they want to fight oppression, instituting government mandates on how people ought to wear their hair seems like a backwards step. I get that culturally we do this all the time, and it's also true that traditional black hairstyles are often seen as unprofessional by the predominantly white corporate culture, but of course I don't think either of these things is right. I wish people could wear what they like.

OccupyWallStreet, BlackLivesMatter, NuitDebout (in France), and so on are, first and foremost, symptoms of a society in upheaval. People's cries for help and/or recognition - for the most part - deserve our sympathetic ear, not to be spat on, as I'm sure the psycho-elites are only too happy to see happen.

Totally agree. That's why I find the injection of these schizoidal academic elements into the equation so troubling... I mean the fact that "whether whites should be exterminated" is treated as a legitimate debate topic on the linked campus debate speaks volumes IMO. We need more sensible and well-adjusted people in positions of influence to turn this around... if it still can be.

Hindsight Man said:
Here's a couple more :

http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/211330/california-grad-students-claim-correcting-their-daniel-greenfield -- correcting spelling is now racist

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/gap-pulls-ad-called-racist-apologizes-critics/story?id=38190519 -- one child leaning on another is racist

This is honestly crazy,it reminds me of one of George Carlin bits on language control,i think it was this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwMukKqx-Os

1. No details given about the spelling is a red flag. There are some legitimate ways language can perpetuate inequalities. Think of the implications of Anglo-Saxon being capitalized but african not. A similar debate about whether Negro should be capitalized occurred in the very early 20th century. I highly doubt the complaint is over "they're" versus "their".

2. The one black girl is being leaned on, and is the saddest looking of the bunch. I would forgive them for seeing racism in that. A part of me actually wonders if the creators of the ad exploited race sensitivity to gain attention for the brand. It's how people get others to talk about them - just look at Trump.
 
''1. No details given about the spelling is a red flag. There are some legitimate ways language can perpetuate inequalities. Think of the implications of Anglo-Saxon being capitalized but african not. A similar debate about whether Negro should be capitalized occurred in the very early 20th century. I highly doubt the complaint is over "they're" versus "their".

2. The one black girl is being leaned on, and is the saddest looking of the bunch. I would forgive them for seeing racism in that. A part of me actually wonders if the creators of the ad exploited race sensitivity to gain attention for the brand. It's how people get others to talk about them - just look at Trump. ''

1. Okay I can see your point about spelling and it could potentially be racist,so i suppose without seeing the actual correction there's no way to tell.
2. I doubt that they used race baiting for publicity's sake,considering they later pulled the ad.But maybe it's a case of bad publicity being better than no publicity at all.

Regarding calls for white genocide,on the one hand I understand that they may see white people as ''The Establishment'' but we know that it's the psycho's who are to blame and saying ''the world would be better off without whites'' is extremely reactionary and is just as bad as calls for a genocide of any other people.This is precisely the kind of thing that further incites racial tensions and therefore plays into the hands of the elites.And that point of view doesn't take into account authoritarians or transmarginal inhibition or man's inherent mechanicalness. Can you say with absolute certainty that without white people psycho's from other races wouldn't simply step in to fill the gap?
 
whitecoast said:
Hindsight Man said:
''She has a point. And he wasn't "assaulted."

And yeah it wasn't full on assault,but it was physical.And over what,a hairstyle?How is having dreadlocks worthy of being grabbed and yelled at in a corridor?

I'm not particularly impressed with either individual in the encounter. But as for cultural appropriation, dreadlocks are not unique to black culture; even Neanderthals and early Europeans had dreadlocks until straighter hair became the norm. If they want to fight oppression, instituting government mandates on how people ought to wear their hair seems like a backwards step. I get that culturally we do this all the time, and it's also true that traditional black hairstyles are often seen as unprofessional by the predominantly white corporate culture, but of course I don't think either of these things is right. I wish people could wear what they like.

I guess I'm somewhat disappointed that the boy couldn't simply stand his ground and handle a simple confrontation over his choice of hairstyle.

Looks to me like Cultural Appropriation is more like a con job if that dreadlocks video is an example of it. One one end, there's the folks like this:

Cultural Appropriation is Bullsh*t
_https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_q0OcWhIDF0&ebc=ANyPxKo2wfcW6wXO9TSVpGQKyA16UMkGskyD0SjeK1DSBUkw6jX9po5zmI7y_7xQTvy545x6PU3kf-4uIJiTsaFpPAJvIPA86g

...who realize dreadlocks aren't the exclusive property of any specific culture and that the 'enforcers' are a relatively small minority within that culture. On the other end there's the girl in that previously linked video who appears to see herself as a representative of her culture and somehow authorized to speak on behalf of that culture to take back something she feels belongs to it, or at least protect it from those who use it for "playing a role without substance."

Whatever the case, "the battle is fought through us" and it seems that those who want to be individuals need to know exactly what they are doing, why they are doing it, and not get caught faking themselves for the purposes of 'play.'

My 2 cents on that.
 
Back
Top Bottom