Going off-roading pt. 1

Published by vegankid | Filed under Uncategorized

I am tired of discussion getting hijacked and deflected by a small number of people, so every time a comment thread starts to become off-topic (but i still feel there is some merit in the discussion) i will redirect the new topic to its own post by deleting the comments and putting them together in a post. Those that continue to de-rail conversation will undergo a process of comment moderation. As a moderator dealing the with electronic medium of our discussion, i feel this is the only way to maintain focus and actual do what it is that we are here to do - discuss how to be good allies. I’ve already received emails from folks saying that they like the premise of the Unlearning Racism series, but they do not feel comfortable joining in the discussion because of the direction in which it is going. If you feel i am being to harsh, you may leave. For now, i will only implement this policy strictly on the Unlearning Racism series.

First off, somehow the discussion about triggers got turned into a discussion about what is and isn’t acceptable behavior and thought for social change. Just to make it easier to read, i’m formatting the comments to take up less space, but i will not change a single word. Here’s where the discussion got off-track:

douglass: I thought we were being honest here. You know how language works. Or in the words of BFP to a colorblind ally;

“I encourage you to not flinch or hide from the history of racism and violence that communities of color have been subjected to by white people, rather instead, learn that history, see how it very much applies to what is happening today, and use that knowlege to better confront the structures of oppression and violence that our governments–state, local and federal– were built upon. “

See that, VK. State, Local, and Federal. If what you are getting at is what BFP is getting at; agitating for anti-democratic pressure on the elected representatives of the American people; then VK, I am you enemy. But, if you goal is to educate whites about racism so that you can make a difference and help people end racism; I’m with you 100%.

brownfemipower (bfp): sigh. douglass. vegan and i are two seperate beings. i spoke that on *my* blog, which is in no way affiliated with this blog. Clearly, i make you very uncomfortable, so I offically remove myself from this conversation.

douglass: woah!! BFP, I used your words as an example of a person who fights for antiracism so that antiracism can be used as a means to an end. (correct me If I’m wrong)

You don’t make me uncomfortable. I selected your words as an example because they are articulate. We have different politics, that’s understood. So in a political sense, I am your enemy (on the grounds that you are revolting against the American Government for some reason, no matter how noble). But, I understand that If I was in your shoes I would think like you think. I have no problem with you personally. I am interested in hearing your side of things; so if you want to leave this discussion, please don’t blame it on a nonexistent sensitivity.

IrrationalPoint (IP): Douglass:“on the grounds that you are revolting against the American Government for some reason”

How is lobbying or pressuring elected officials anti-democratic? I didn’t see BFP’s remarks as suggest a “revolt” or overthrow of the US government. Confronting racist social structures doesn’t imply an overthrow of the government.

“But, I understand that If I was in your shoes I would think like you think.”

Can you clarify this please? (I’m not trying to be confrontational here — I just think that empathy is key in overcoming prejudices and oppressive structures. So what I’m asking for is an articulation of what you’re expressing.)

douglass: IP, here are your answers:

#1 http://brownfemipower.com/?p=216 read BFP’s response to ‘becky’, it’s well said.
#2 you know what I mean. If i was raised the way she was…

IP: I have read BFPs post, and I still don’t see where you’re getting that BFP is advocating an anti-democratic overthrow of the government. That’s not what she said at all.

“you know what I mean”

Sorry, I misexpressed myself. I mean, what is it exactly that you would think differently about and why? That is, what is it that leads you to hold different views given that you can see BFP’s and would share them *if you’d been raised as she was*? (This isn’t meant particularly as a discussion point because it’s not the topic of this thread, and it’s way to open a question — it’s just something I think everyone should think about.)

douglass: IP, This isn’t a committee on un-American activities; But if a person refers to the state local and federal branches of the American government as ’structures of oppression’, then I can say with near-absolute certainty that the person in question person is a traitor. I would remind that person that America is not sugar and spice. America is the capitalist beast that felled the Soviet Union. Cuba is right next-door, waiting to accept people of color into their paradise of equality. But, let’s just say that the choice of POC to stay in the US might be telling of our situation.

#2 You know what I mean, IP. We are raised to think the way we think, it’s the result of socialization and conditioning.

IP: “But if a person refers to the state local and federal branches of the American government as ’structures of oppression’, then I can say with near-absolute certainty that the person in question person is a traitor.”

Because if you disagree with the way a country is run, you’re a traitor?? And that’s not even what BFP said — actually, what BFP said was this:

“the structures of oppression and violence that our governments…were built upon.”

There’s a difference. So before you accuse people of wanting to overthrow elected officials, you should maybe read the text that you’re attacking — what BFP is advocating is confronting the racism that is present in our government and our society, which is not at all the same as the coup d’etat that you’re accusing her of advocating. Am I right, BFP?

“let’s just say that the choice of POC to stay in the US might be telling of our situation. “

Stay in the US? As if many of them are not *from* or raised in the US, and as American as you are? And I wouldn’t be so quick to claim that the choice of immigrant POC is telling of the wonders of American-ness…it might just be telling of the severity of their situations.

As for number 2 (which was intended philosophically and tangentially, so I’m going to stop talking about it after this, because it’s not really relevant to this thread), of course I understood what you mean. I was making a different point (not clearly enough), which is this: given that we are conditioned to think a certain way and accept certain things, but are nevertheless capable of seeing some other people’s points of views and empathising with them, what is it that leads you to reject the other points of view and maintain your own? (In this context or any other, and “you” in the sense of the generic y’all, not you personally.)

douglass: well, IP, whatever, you can fell a brass statue by replacing the feet with clay. Treason was not the right word, how about this one: that person is fundamentally opposed to free-market neoliberalism and globalization. (Where the unusual prosperity comes from). IP, are you on a moral Fatwa?

IP: A moral Fatwah, eh? LOL! (If you were referring to my final paragraph in my last comment, it was purely the philosophical ramblings of a tired mind, not directed at you specifically, and not intended to be taken very seriously.)

douglass: IP: Allāhu Akbar!! Still, I don’t see how radical socialists can even entertain the notion that if elected to office, they would uphold and defend the constitution of the United States; hence their status as ‘seditious agitators’.

IP: “I don’t see how radical socialists can even entertain the notion that if elected to office”

I disagree, but this is not a topic for this thread, I don’t think, so let’s not discuss it here.

Share This