Woke! Just . . . woke man!!! A regular Junior James Baldwin!
But seriously — I’ve been reading stuff on the net like this for years. The concept of “whiteness” started with some silly academic conferences way back in the nineties. It’s just an academic gloss on the same old “Hate Whitey” view, introducing the new claim that whites are so full of hate that they have a history of hating, and excluding, even white sub-groups. And in the last decade or so, various left wing hate bloggers have adopted it enthusiastically, to give their visceral hatred and bigotry a sophisticated academic-sounding sheen.
Criticising “whiteness” lets the friends on your side know you’re cool with hating white people, while claiming to opponents that — “No I don’t hate white people. I just hate the injustice they brought to this Eden. Not all white people of course. I think if you gave me a week I might come up with a few that aren’t responsible,”
So, why is this paragraph nonsense? There’s the absolutely astonishingly naive belief that once whites are destroyed ( sorry, “white supremacy” is destroyed) racism will end. As if once white people, or rather just their “whiteness,” are consigned to their well-deserved oblivion, there will no longer be any supremacy whatsoever. Perfect equality and justice will reign, finally, now that the whites have been dealt with. Alternatively, if the good professor might allow that some other group might establish hegemony, well then, why is that supremacy better than white supremacy? Would that group — whoever wins the non-white, post whiteness-into-oblivion sweepstakes — not use their power to privilege themselves?
After all — this is a professor of sociology! You expect some realization that when one group is stomped into oblivion, the other group is as often as not, not a whole lot better, and sometimes even a good deal worse. Was the Indian caste system better than racism? Did the Mongols — who were pretty good at destroying the supremacy of others — cultivate diversity?. If today’s injustice is built on a foundation of racism, why would tomorrows injustice be better if it’s built on some different foundation?
Finally, the professor’s claim that racism will end when white’s supremacy is destroyed is belied by the fact that supposed social science and victim studies scholars commonly define racism as a combination of prejudice and institutional power. So when whiteness is “expanded into oblivion” there will be no prejudice? No one will have institutional power?
It’s when you start asking questions like this, you realize the professor — privileged with his taxpayer funded position — didn’t even bother to think carefully about what he wrote. He doesn’t have to, because the audience he shares his bubble with loves any tasty word salad mixing racism, whiteness, “destroy” and “oblivion.”