In fact, my color-blindness is now a “micro-aggression”, because by refusing to consider race as a valid categorization I “deny the significance of a person of color’s racial/ethnic experience and history” and “deny the individual as a racial/cultural being”, which I suppose causes her pain. — NOS4A2

I overtly refuse to consider race a "valid" categorization, and I overtly deny "racial/ethnic experience" as something that should be significant or focused on. I'm happy to do that. If we all did that we could move on and worry about things that are important to worry about.

I don't know why people want to focus on race so much now, but it's been a big mistake in my opinion.

The original PC-acuity. I like to say, if you push special treatment for minorities to its logical conclusion, we all become minorities, at which point we all become equal again. Which is the way it should be. So much less complicated and more effective!

I don't know why people want to focus on race so much now, but it's been a big mistake in my opinion. — Terrapin Station

Ideological subversion, is my guess.

'Color-blindness' ignores the history of racial constructionism, which was and continues to be a sociological reality that affects people in ways both material and ideological. The path towards a more equal society is to acknowledge how this racial construction materialized in history, how it manifests itself today, and how it has affected society and its subjects. Ignoring it only serves to perpetuate it and leaves us unable to combat it.

In many public and most professional situations if one is a racial minority - member of an out-group or caste - one doesn't have the luxury of "racial color-blindness" because a racial minority's daily prospects, even life, more often than not depends on vigilance - one quickly, correctly, seeing how 'race & color' are seen (i.e. signified) by some members of the racial majority e.g. white cops (US) - and thereby conducting oneself accordingly.

Survivors are always seeing threats even where they aren't any; false positives are far less risky, and more readily correctable, than false negatives. Only privileged, non-survivors of racial-color hatred can luxuriate in the kumbaya mindset of "racial color-blind" utopianism in an era where I'd estimate a majority of people on this planet are subject to the indignities and discriminations of racism-colorism. The rest must soldier on daily, individually and in solidarity, surviving and resisting by 'calling a spade a spade' whenever possible or unbearable not to do so.

If there's "back-peddling" go on - "I'm shocked, shocked" - in the non-survivors' "racial color-blind" casino, that's certainly not good news for the survivors ... but nothing more shocking that a return of the repressed-like pendulum swing in the 'burbs. After all, the catastrophic legacy of the last half millennium of conquistador plundering, genocide, slavery has crushed our 'liberal republics' into ossified racial color-caste structures of cultural & economic imbalance. That's "the content of" everyone's (Western - at the very least) "character" - survivor & non-survivor alike (vide Bourdieu re: habitus). All y'all need is love ain't nearly enough by an effin' longshot (says the lifelong, rabid, Fabs fan!) :victory:


:up: :strong:

'Color-blindness' ignores the history of racial constructionism, which was and continues to be a sociological reality that affects people in ways both material and ideological. The path towards a more equal society is to acknowledge how this racial construction materialized in history, how it manifests itself today, and how it has affected society and its subjects. Ignoring it only serves to perpetuate it and leaves us unable to combat it.

Actually, “color-blindness” is more a refusal to engage in “racial constructionism”.

we are always already engaged in it

I suppose, then, that it was only a matter of time that the oppressed would adopt the pseudoscience and superstitions of the oppressors, if not as a security blanket, then as a whip.

we are always already engaged in it

That sounds to me an admission of guilt than a statement of fact.

When in the master's house, learn from the master to use the master's tools in order to Master Oneself and/or master the master himself if one can.

Liberty, as I understand it, demands nothing less. :death: :flower:

When in the master's house, learn from the master to use the master's tool to master oneself and/or the master himself if one can.

Liberty, as I understand it, demands nothing less.

Neither does hypocrisy.

You can't outrun your (people's class' society's ...) own shadow. Or jump out of your own skin-color with its historic scars. A "PC" parlor game for hypocrites & fools. Have fun diddling ...

Your opening post simply santizes the history and continued practice of racial subjugation, prejudice, exclusion, etc. History is nowhere awknowledged in your opening. The only way in which colorblindness is a viable anti-racist practice is if there was never a history of racial constructionism in the first place.

Again, colorblindness is a way of treating others that does not entail denying racism, just refusing to engage in and practice racism. Anti-colorblindness is a massive straw man in this regard.

Historically people have been treated as members of racial groups, convicted of some form or other of essentialism, and treated accordingly. It seems to me prudent to refuse engaging in racism if we want to banish it.

Historically people have been treated as members of racial groups, convicted of some form or other of essentialism, and treated accordingly. It seems to me prudent to refuse engaging in racism if we want to banish it. — NOS4A2

Accepting the history (and continuance!) of racism, as you acknowledge in this first sentence here, does not mean "engaging in racism". The best way to refuse to engage in racism is to understand how it affects people.

Accepting the history (and continuance!) of racism, as you acknowledge in this first sentence here, does not mean "engaging in racism". The best way to refuse to engage in racism is to understand how it affects people.

What I mean is, colorblindness is refusing to engage in racism. It’s to do the opposite of what racists have done throughout history.

A question for the people who consider themselves “against colorblindness”: is treating everyone the same regardless of their race “colorblindness” in your book?

The reason why “colour blindness” is out of fashion is because race baiting and victim culture are IN fashion. Part of the dogma of that trend is that white people are inherently racist, and “colour blindness” goes against that narrative. They do not want a white person to be able to escape a charge of racism by saying they do not see race, so they make the obvious defense against a charge of racism something in itself racist.
Its all part of the dogma and training coming out of universities these days, part of an authoritarian movement and the strategies used to push a toxic ideology. Its part of a complex set of talking points and nonsense meant to inoculate these types of people against criticism as well as to preserve their great weapon in their war for authoritarian control, the charge of racism. Its vital they can call every white person a racist, because then anyone speaking out against their authoritarian agenda can be dismissed, attacked or whatever...after all, who would ever defend or listen to a racist?
Its the same thing with terms like “nazi”, “alt right”, “alt right adjacent”, all used as a tool to smear and dismiss ideological opponents. All you have to do is attach the label, then all your work is done. You dont need to reason, defend your toxic, authoritarian ideology or even listen at all. Just sit back and wait for anyone to go “wait wtf?!” And then call them a racist too.
Its disgusting. Its foolish and its dangerous.

racial constructionism, which was and continues to be a sociological reality that affects people in ways both material and ideological. — Maw

What exactly is the definition of racial constructionism, how are we confirming that there is such a thing, and how are we confirming its effect on people?

So why are we back-peddling on racial color-blindness? Why are we teaching kids to be conscious of another’s race, and to factor it into their judgements and treatment of others? Are we heading backwards? — NOS4A2

And why are you so counter-woke?

You think that those silly woke progressives blabbering about intersectionality etc. are genuinely some kind of a threat to our culture? You really think there is this "assault" against color-blindness, which is there to reinstate racism and racist thought to our time only in a different format? That really people are demanding us to look at each other not as individuals, but first and foremost as members of a race, gender and so one that define us so much that what people actually think doesn't matter?

How difficult is it to understand that when something is done to end totally open and apparent racism, when racism has been curtailed, the movement based on simple and very popular demands loses it's straightforward push. When any movement comes to it's third or fourth 'wave', the cries of "there's a lot more to do on this issue" become more desperate, more strange and more distant from the original objectives that have been met.

Common sense will prevail. The World isn't going to end.

And why are you so counter-woke?

You think that those silly woke progressives blabbering about intersectionality etc. are genuinely some kind of a threat to our culture? You really think there is this "assault" against color-blindness, which is there to reinstate racism and racist thought to our time only in a different format? That really people are demanding us to look at each other not as individuals, but first and foremost as members of a race, gender and so one that define us so much that what people actually think doesn't matter?

I really do believe it. This is an aspect of racism that now permeates throughout American culture and is spreading, to the point that it has become institutional, manifesting in policies such as “diversity training” for example. It is being taught in school. I’m not sure where you live, but take a peak.

I really do believe it. This is an aspect of racism that now permeates throughout American culture and is spreading, to the point that it has become institutional, manifesting in policies such as “diversity training” for example. It is being taught in school. I’m not sure where you live, but take a peak. — NOS4A2

Why would you believe it?

You should learn more about the Soviet Union. You see, things that don't work... don't work. And they keep not working even if people imagine them working. And how large the Overton window is or isn't doesn't matter when it doesn't work.

In the Soviet Union they had there all these kinds of programs to create a new society and the prime way to do this was to create a New Soviet Man. This was to be done through educating the new generations (as current ones seemed to be such a disappointment). The new generation would create the socialist Paradise. But of course it didn't work and everything become just talking utterly pointless and empty bullshit, which was called "lithurgy". And in the end nobody didn't believe in the system that didn't work except we the people in the West. And homo sovieticus took a totally different meaning, basically meaning an average conformist just muddling through (and usually using a lot of vodka to do it).

Now your problem seems to be that you believe that it would work. Oh, they are having 'diversity training' in school! What will happen to new generations now? As if 'diversity training' would be highly successful.

Americans had this problem especially when thinking about communists and the Soviet Union. It can be seen in the stereotypes of Soviets in Hollywood movies during the Cold War. Never were these bad guys anywhere close to being actually Russian (or Ukrainian etc.), these happy go lucky sentimental slavs, who unfortunately have these monstrous corrupt societies.

What exactly is the definition of racial constructionism, how are we confirming that there is such a thing, and how are we confirming its effect on people? — Terrapin Station

Feel free to check out Ibram X. Kendi's excellent book, Stamped from the Beginning: The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America, if you doubt the historicity of racism

No I don’t think it would work, and completely agree with you, but human bodies no less end up becoming the brick and mortar to their failed schemes, long before the dogma is abandoned. The Soviet Union lasted for 70 years.

What I worry about is the injustice of it all, plain and simple.

This is an aspect of racism that now permeates throughout American culture and is spreading, to the point that it has become institutional, manifesting in policies such as “diversity training” for example. It is being taught in school. — NOS4A2

human bodies no less end up becoming the brick and mortar to their failed schemes, long before the dogma is abandoned — NOS4A2

oh wow

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/q-and-a/the-true-and-false-virtues-of-the-left-robert-boyers?source=EDT_NYR_EDIT_NEWSLETTER_0_imagenewsletter_Daily_ZZ&utm_campaign=aud-dev&utm_source=nl&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=TNY_Daily_101319&utm_medium=email&bxid=5bd670e52ddf9c619438e798&cndid=23178531&esrc=&mbid=CRMNYR062419&utm_term=TNY_Daily

I think this article touches on a lot of the issues both of you are worried about.

This is an aspect of racism that now permeates throughout American culture and is spreading, to the point that it has become institutional, manifesting in policies such as “diversity training” for example. It is being taught in school.
— NOS4A2

oh wow — Maw

This is worth looking at head on, because this is what we have come to. This is the logic that applies also at times to freedom of speech and justice, and above all the organisation of workers into unions.

Race is a social construct, therefore race does not exist.
Therefore diversity training is fake training.
This fake training unfairly affects white people, therefore it is racist.

I happens all the time these days, though not usually quite as blatantly. In fact it happened to me the other day on the Brexit thread. Pointing out racist tropes is said to be racist, and racism is something that only white people suffer from.

Similarly one cannot criticise people who say such things because 'freedom of speech'.

It's the political equivalent of 'He who smelt it dealt it.' And there's a lot of it about.

I don't know if we are back peddling on color blindness, I don't know of a time where race wasn't a big way in which many people see others. I think there are a few main reasons for the continuation:
1. Racial Histories - As for instance, an African-American, you have a separate history than a white American.
2. Racialised statistics - Crime, wealth, education, voting and so on, are all popularly divided by race which leads to a greater racial focus.
3. Low requirement for "racism" - Culture, religion, language, food and many other things can't be criticised without risk of being called racist. So even if you are not actually racist, people will say you are and this puts a spotlight on "race" which goes beyond what it should.
4. News on racism - I think people are very interested in this topic for a number of reasons, racism and racial differences is constantly reported on.

There are many more though.

With 1 & 2, it's clear you can't fix past injustices and racial inequality without making race an important issue. The only way to proceed with an unracialised perspective is to forget about racial histories (i.e. All Americans (or insert nationality) share a history, not based on skin colour) and forget about racial inequality. I think for many people, it's inconcievable to do that because it's seen as unfair, an outlook that requires 1 & 2. I think, ironically, the racism is being perperuated by the people who care about 1 & 2 because reducing racism is not the main goal and people who see color blindness as the solution don't see this difference.

Reducing racism at this point, will not undo the fact that because of the past, many non-white races are disadvantaged in many areas across life. It is also requires forgiving these inequities which is hard for some. People still see others as part of a racial history, African Americans are former slaves and whites are former slave owners and without changing this outlook, you cannot achieve color blindness.

Of course, the people who I say are perpetuating racism probably don't see it that way but I don't see racism going away where race is extremely important and they're making it very important. Racism would go away if everyone was color-blind but the inequities would remain, I think for some it's more important to keep color-blindness out rather than forgive the inequities.

Feel free to check out Ibram X. Kendi's excellent book, Stamped from the Beginning: The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America, if you doubt the historicity of racism — Maw

I thought we might be able to discuss some of this stuff on this discussion board. Does that book define racial "constructionism" and explain the epistemological aspects of asserting it? That's what I was interested in.

I just checked on Amazon, by the way, using the "Look Inside" feature, and I searched in the book for the word "constructionism." Zero hits. So how would that answer the questions I asked?