- Joined
- Apr 22, 2019
- Messages
- 33,858
- Reaction score
- 15,282
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Of course, this is simplified.
White people are in all three groups. Others are mostly in the first group.
The first group is, people who support a concept of racial justice. They want equality based on race, and oppose any obstacles to it, whether principles or practical, whether current actions or legacy effects of past racism. They want civil rights, economic justice, equal opportunity, and more.
The second group are the white supremacists. They explicitly support, to varying degrees, policies that maintain advantages for white people. They might think they're not racist; instead of justifying a policy for the reason it's anti-black, they might justify it by saying things like 'blacks need to take more responsibility, and then they can have more', buying into justifications for such policies.
The third group is the one rarely talked about. It's the 'non-racial' person: the person who has hostility to racial issues as political issues. They're just annoyed by and hostile to people bringing up racial issues. The don't like the white supremacists, and they don't like the black activists. They tend to see black activists as corrupt and selfish and cynical people exploiting the issue for their own power and benefit. They're for 'neutral' laws in principle; they do not want to hear anything about 'what black people are going through' or 'legacy effects of racism' or pretty much anything else. Just shut up about race. These people very much do not think they are racist, but are some of the strongest opponents of changes to increase racial justice.
Because we tend to only talk about the first two groups, our politics have a hard time addressing the issues blocked by the third group.
Not recognizing the third group even exists, not talking to and about them, makes it hard to make changes.
White people are in all three groups. Others are mostly in the first group.
The first group is, people who support a concept of racial justice. They want equality based on race, and oppose any obstacles to it, whether principles or practical, whether current actions or legacy effects of past racism. They want civil rights, economic justice, equal opportunity, and more.
The second group are the white supremacists. They explicitly support, to varying degrees, policies that maintain advantages for white people. They might think they're not racist; instead of justifying a policy for the reason it's anti-black, they might justify it by saying things like 'blacks need to take more responsibility, and then they can have more', buying into justifications for such policies.
The third group is the one rarely talked about. It's the 'non-racial' person: the person who has hostility to racial issues as political issues. They're just annoyed by and hostile to people bringing up racial issues. The don't like the white supremacists, and they don't like the black activists. They tend to see black activists as corrupt and selfish and cynical people exploiting the issue for their own power and benefit. They're for 'neutral' laws in principle; they do not want to hear anything about 'what black people are going through' or 'legacy effects of racism' or pretty much anything else. Just shut up about race. These people very much do not think they are racist, but are some of the strongest opponents of changes to increase racial justice.
Because we tend to only talk about the first two groups, our politics have a hard time addressing the issues blocked by the third group.
Not recognizing the third group even exists, not talking to and about them, makes it hard to make changes.
