The New Willard

Wiley Cody, over at the enlightened Big Sky Cairn, really missed the point on this one and so did Craig (MT Politics). It’s dangerous for ill informed people to comment on racial issues because they see cultural understanding, and the means necessary to get to a place of understanding, as over-the-top political correctness.

Well, Wiley Cody and Craig, by criticizing Colorado’s attempts to bring about racial awareness in higher education you (1) demonstrate what white “benefit” (as I prefer to call it, because not everyone is granted all privilege defined under “white privilege”; e.g. homosexuals, the poor, woman) and (2) you demonstrate your lack of historical knowledge in terms of the word “white” and what it means racially.

On the first subject, you simply don’t understand what is meant by white “privilege” – it means that whites, like myself, are, for the most part, oblivious to the fact that their IS a culture of “whiteness,” but because it is normative, only things outside of the “norm” are recognizable; you can’t persecute the invisible (well, it’s pretty hard). White “privilege” does NOT mean that just because you’re white you’re a racist; it simply means that having lighter skin pigmentation comes with benefits in a culture aware of this thing called “race.” That is pretty much as simple as I can make a very, very complex issue like race.

Thank you, for illustrating the students’ concerns – maybe you should apply.

Both Craig and that Wiley Cody seemed to have a big problem with this definition of race:

An ever evolving [sic] social, legal and political construct that has no basis in biological fact.*

Well, guys, that IS what race is… now I want you to think really hard, way back in history and we’ll see how the concept of race is constantly changing to fit political and economic situations. Did you know, that at one time, only Anglo-Saxons were considered white (and that was after the term had become more inclusive)? For example, When the Irish first started coming to the US in large numbers, they were NOT considered to be white. Did you know, that only when people of color, having formerly been slaves, and people of Irish decent started banding together in the north (e.g. unions) did the ruling class begin to refer to the Irish as “white,” thus breaking the allegiance by creating racial tension?

Sounds like some kind of a change to me, eh?

How about eastern Europeans? Not always considered to be white. How about European Jews? Some Jews consider themselves white, others don’t, others do and don’t(the same is true for the views of the non-Jewish community). Hell, I have a number of Jewish friends who regularly argue about the subject?

Doesn’t seem like race is a solid concept; doesn’t sound like race is free from perversion.

How about my friend of Persian decent? I always thought he was what one might call “white,” but he has told me numerous times about not being considered “white” in school and being told “to go home.”

I’m white, why didn’t I see race like those kids he went to school? Probably because we had two different conceptions of “whiteness” – thus, race evolves.

Race, based on skin pigmentation, is as arbitrary a way to group people as eye color.

The point of exploring white “privilege” is to realize how arbitrary skin color is and then to combat the harmful effects of classifying people in such an absurd system.

If you’re interested in reading Wiley Cody’s confused ranting on a subject he hasn’t even attempted to understand, go here. You HAVE to check out the giant image he has up of Secretary of State Rice posing as some kind of rebutle to white “privilege;” could you be more tokenizing? Again, Big Sky Cairn, through confusion and misunderstanding, proves their “opponents” right.

Cody and Craig, I think you really need to know what you’re talking about before you talk about it.