19 Responses to “Pride”

1. A Black Girl Says:
   July 7th, 2006 at 9:36 pm I stumbled upon your site through some random linkage... and I'd like to make a comment about the above post.
   
   Interestingly enough. I had a conversation with former SNCC member and Social Justice activist Ruby Sales...
   
   While yes, there is no comparison to white pride vs. black pride I would like for folks of the lighter hue to consider the issue of ethnic death within all of this. Racism, and race-making (read the making of white supremacy) murdered the "ethnicity" of Europeans (made white folk). Culture and community is something people of color do because they are primitive and quaint... "advanced" (read white folk) do not need to consider community because the world is thiers...
   
   Such ideology, one can argue, leads to a kind of hunger for culture... and in comes bell hook's concept of "eating the other." Which is just as racist (if not more biting) than outright racial slurring.
   
   An example of this is the subject of the book Everything but the Burden" ed. by Greg Tate.
   
   Its all very messy.
2. Rachel S Says:
   July 8th, 2006 at 2:15 am I think you make an excellent point. For me personally, I would never say I am proud to be White. I'm not ashamed of my Whiteness, but I'm not proud of it either. I tend to be proud of my accomplishments or the way I conduct myself not things that were assigned to me.
   
   I also wonder what White people mean when they say they have racial pride. So my question to douglass would be what exactly are your proud of related to being what? What does that statement mean to you?
3. IrrationalPoint Says:
   July 8th, 2006 at 3:51 am In the other thread I said I wasn't sure what it meant to be proud of my race. What does it mean to be proud of being Jewish or Latina? As you said, I'm not ashamed of it, I am what I am.
   
   --IP
4. IrrationalPoint Says:
   July 8th, 2006 at 4:15 am Interesting, ABG.
   
   "Culture and community is something people of color do because they are primitive and quaint... "advanced" (read white folk) do not need to consider community because the world is thiers..."
   
   I'm not sure I completely agree that all Europeans don't keep their culture in the US eg, European Jews, many of whom do consider community and traditions and so on. And white Jews are not subject to racism that is based on colour (leaving aside anti-semitism for a minute, which is certainly a form of racism, but not really based on skin colour).
   
   --IP
5. Changeseeker Says:
   July 8th, 2006 at 8:10 am "So continuing to promote whiteness as good sounds like a justification of or support for a white-centric system."
   
   I agree. It's one of the downsides of "Whiteness." Besides, "White" is NOT an ethnicity. It's a social construct and it's not even literal. With the possible exception of albino people, no one is "white" and even albino is not an ethnicity. I am European-American, to my knowledge--English and Scotch-Irish to be exact. That's my ethnicity. If I want to celebrate English history or Scotch-Irish food, I can, but I don't feel particular connection to either. I do feel connected to my Kentucky mountain roots in both positive and negative ways, but none of these ethnic reference points is a source of "pride" that could be constued as making me somehow better than anyone else of any other background.
   
   I think one of A Black Girl's points is also important: that Europeans literally concocted the concept of "Black" for the express purpose of being able to subjugate individuals from a whole gamut of African ethnicities and steal either them or their resources for the enrichment of Europe and Europeans. Then, early European-Americans drafted the concept of "White" for the purpose of making sure that lower echelon European-American workers and indentured servants could have benefits African workers and/or slaves didn't receive. This also allowed for punishing "White" workers who didn't choose to recognize a social difference between themselves and the Africans. So the "heritage" of Whiteness, were there such a thing (and I would continue to argue that there is not), would be necessarily something that no one but a racist bigot could possible point to with pride.
6. Rachel S Says:
   July 8th, 2006 at 1:48 pm I second changeseeker and a Black girl. The downfall of ethnicity has dramatically impact the meaning of "pride" among Whites.
7. douglass Says:
   July 8th, 2006 at 5:20 pm Rachels said,
   
   "So my question to Douglass would be what exactly are your proud of related to being what? What does that statement mean to you? "
   
   Changeseeker said:
   
   ". So the "heritage" of Whiteness, were there such a thing (and I would continue to argue that there is not), would be necessarily something that no one but a racist bigot could possible point to with pride. "
   
   IP said " So continuing to promote whiteness as good sounds like a justification of or support for a white-centric system. White pride comes across as support for a system in which white is good, and black (or brown or whatever) is bad. Which is racist."
   
   
   Ok, I am responding to all of you at once, feel free to chime in if you think I skipped something you said.
   
   I am not proud because the idea of ethnic nationalism makes me feel uncomfortable.
   
   But,
   
   I reserve the right to be proud to an equal degree as a Person of color can be proud without being slandered as a 'racist bigot' or an 'extremist'.
   
   I reserve that right because otherwise I am endorsing the message that white people are inherently bad, or at least 'not allowed' to express certain sentiments regarding their heritage because the history of that heritage is supposed to be frowned on.
   
   The notion that white people should be ashamed of their history is one I do NOT accept on the grounds that is an anti-white revisionist interpretation that is designed to place white individuals at a disadvantage in today's political framework.
   
   On a side note:
   
   A black girl: I really liked your emphasis on the concept of 'ethnic death'.
   
   I think That (ethnic death) occurred with the creation of the 'white race, but it also occurred with the terms 'black' and 'people of color', and I do keep in mind the fact that 'black' was a term designed to subjugate whereas 'poc' seems to be encouraging ethnic death amongst non-whites as to usher in a defacto Bandung Conference. the concept of eating the ‘other’ is interesting. By eating, does that mean destroying? Subjugating? assimilating?, er… What exactly does ‘eating’ mean?
8. A Black Girl Says:
   July 9th, 2006 at 12:59 am It is a reference to a concept discussed in Black Looks by bell hooks. She talks about a trend practiced by some white folk who feel the need to "practice" or take on elements of black culture (for example, but this applies to many POC) or even Black people as a practice of attempting to free themselves of racism, or to prove they are not racist. The irony is that the act of "taking on" is imperialistic.
9. IrrationalPoint Says:
   July 9th, 2006 at 12:21 pm A Black Girl:
   
   I'm not sure I understand what you're saying about the downfall of ethnicity. Do you mean that, on some level, ethnicity and skin colour are independent? I do agree with that -- after all, what constitutes "black culture"? Black people may be from any number of countries and cultures. As can white people. Am I reading you correctly?
   
   "that Europeans literally concocted the concept of "Black" for the express purpose of being able to subjugate individuals from a whole gamut of African ethnicities"
   
   Equally, the concept of "white" is concocted, as white could mean French, Irish, German, EuroAmerican, etc, and those are all different cultures.
   
   Douglass:
   
   "I reserve the right to be proud to an equal degree as a Person of color can be proud without being slandered as a 'racist bigot' or an 'extremist'."
   
   You are neglecting to take into account the heirarchichal differences between black pride and white pride. Consider a situation in which positions are reversed: black people are higher in the social heierachy than whites; whites are systematically excluded on a socioeconomic level which is reflected in their absence from cultural activities, eg, their artistic and acdemic contributions to society are not acknowledge or are attributed to blacks, they are rarely seen in protagonist roles on TV, or in adverts, or as icons of beauty. In that world, black pride would be racist, because of the structural power differences between blacks and whites.
   
   "I reserve that right because otherwise I am endorsing the message that white people are inherently bad"
   
   No one is saying that white people are inherently bad. Where have we said that?
   
   "or at least 'not allowed' to express certain sentiments regarding their heritage because the history of that heritage is supposed to be frowned on."
   
   Depends on what you mean by heritage. That is, if by heritage you mean, pride in your German/Irish/Scottish/Spanish/whatever ancestry, and the cultures of that ancestry, then that's not pride in being white, that's pride in your *culture*.
   
   If by heritage, you mean "pride in the history of the concpet of whiteness" then that *is* something to be frowned upon, because the history of the concept of whiteness is a history of racism.
   
   "The notion that white people should be ashamed of their history is one I do NOT accept"
   
   Again, it depends on what you mean by the "history of white people". The history of France or England or whatever is not something that one needs necessarily to be ashamed of.
   
   That said, I don't think shame in the history of one's heritage (whatever constitutes "heritage") is something one ought to be because I don't think shame is useful -- that's the point in feeling ashamed of what your ancestors did or didn't do? It's not like you can change what they did. But not being proud doesn't have to be the same as being ashamed -- the half of my family that is white is not something I am ashamed of. I am neither proud nor ashamed of looking white -- I am what I am.
   
   That's NOT to say that one shouldn't try to change the injustices of a system we've been born into, whatever "side" we were born into.
   
   "I am not proud because the idea of ethnic nationalism makes me feel uncomfortable."
   
   Can you articulate what makes you uncomfortable about it? Does this not contradict you position on white pride?
   
   --IP
10. IrrationalPoint Says:
    July 12th, 2006 at 11:27 am Bummer. I wrote a megalong comment but it appears to have spontaneously combusted. So here's Take 2:
    
    A Black Girl:
    
    I'm not sure I'm completely understanding what you;re saying about ethnic death. Do you mean that "white culture" and "black culture" are both constructs, because white people can come from any number of countries and traditions, same as black people? If so, I think that's a really important point. White pride is not pride in culture but pride in skin colour.
    
    Douglass:
    
    "I reserve the right to be proud to an equal degree as a Person of color can be proud without being slandered as a 'racist bigot' or an 'extremist'."
    
    You're not taking structural power differences into account. If the positions were reversed, and black people were systematically more powerful than white people, then black pride would be racist bigottry.
    
    "I reserve that right because otherwise I am endorsing the message that white people are inherently bad, or at least 'not allowed' to express certain sentiments regarding their heritage because the history of that heritage is supposed to be frowned on."
    
    Nobody is saying that white people are inherently bad. I would query the matter of heritage, though.
    
    If by heritage, you mean culture, then nobody is saying that either. No one is saying that Irish-American or German-American or whatever culture is bad. What we're saying is that "whiteness" as a concept exists as a function of the oppression of non-white people. So if by "heritage" you mean "history of oppressing black people", then I can't understand how that is something to be proud of.
    
    "The notion that white people should be ashamed of their history is one I do NOT accept"
    
    In general, I'm not a fan of the idea of being ashamed of history. It's not a useful concept; I mean, it's not like it changes anything. It is possible to be neither proud nor ashamed -- you can say "I have the skin colour of my skin colour. I am what I am" and be neither proud of it nor frowning upon it. You don't have to be ashamed of whiteness to recognise that we're all part of a system that has a great many injustices in it, and that we all need to work towards changing that.
    
    --IP
11. douglass Says:
    July 12th, 2006 at 10:59 pm Hey IP:
    
    You said: "You're not taking structural power differences into account. If the positions were reversed, and black people were systematically more powerful than white people, then black pride would be racist bigotry."
    
    I disagree.
    
    Are you saying that ‘black’ individuals should be punished in a situation where the ‘black’ group has more power than other groups????
    
    In that situation, I think a black individual has just as much of a right to express pride as any other individual.
    
    IP said: "Nobody is saying that white people are inherently bad"
    
    Really.
    
    I meant to say ‘racist’ not ‘bad’.
    
    But anyway,
    
    Racism is supposed to be bad, so I stand by my assertion.
    
    Carefully examine the semantics of "white people are inherently bad”
    
    'White’ and ‘black’ are ‘racial’ categories that came from the need to__________ (insert your favorite reason/s for why the idea of ‘race’ happened) about 400 years ago in the American colonies.
    
    So, The term 'white' is a racial categorization based entirely on exclusivity.
    
    The act of identifying with ‘whites’ entitles un-identifying with ‘non-whites’
    
    The act I just labeled ‘un-identifying’ is officially labeled ‘racism’.
    
    So, in order to identify as white, a person must participate in the act of being racist towards non-whites.
    
    And racism is bad.
    
    So, white=racist, racist=bad
    
    
    
    
    On the topic of heritage, of course nobody is saying that [European nation X--American] culture is bad.
    
    That’s because such people act as if 400 years of ‘whiteness’ didn’t have a demographic effect on the American population.
    
    Such people are denying the bastardization (diffusion?) of European genes that occurred on the American continent; the bastardization that produced a person like me who is part German, part English, part Spanish and part Scottish.
    
    As long as the genes that produce ‘white’ skin are regressive,
    White skinned peoples cannot survive on planet earth without resorting to racism.
    
    That situation is what it is.
    
    But, as I was writing the truth hit me in the head like a sack of bricks:
    
    The goal of preserving ‘white’ skin is quite aimless compared to the goal of having a just society.
12. IrrationalPoint Says:
    July 13th, 2006 at 1:20 am "Are you saying that ‘black’ individuals should be punished in a situation where the ‘black’ group has more power than other groups????"
    
    No, I'm saying that supremacy is bad and people who celebrate it are racist. Because pride in skin colour, if you happen to be on top of the pile, is celebration of the system that put you on top of the pile. In the world we live in, white people a higher in the social hierarchy, at the expense of other groups, and celebrating that is bigottry.
    
    No, I don't think white *people* are inherently bad, or that having skin of colour X is bad.
    
    "The act I just labeled ‘un-identifying’ is officially labeled ‘racism’."
    
    No. The act of oppression, or the acting out of prejudice is officially labelled racism. I can "un-identify" as any number of things, but that does not make me prejudiced against them. I'm not black, but not being black doesn't in and of itself make me racist. Skin colour doesn't determine your prejudices or lack thereof, and therefore can't possibly determine whether you are bad or not.
    
    "As long as the genes that produce ‘white’ skin are regressive,
    White skinned peoples cannot survive on planet earth without resorting to racism."
    
    Anyone who thinks that maintaining whiteness is a worthy goal is racist, because the underlying assumption is that having white skin is somehow better than non-white skin, and that maintaining white skin is a good thing. What's the point of it?
    
    "The goal of preserving ‘white’ skin is quite aimless compared to the goal of having a just society."
    
    Yup.
    
    --IP
13. douglass Says:
    July 13th, 2006 at 10:32 pm Oh, IP.
    
    You wrote,
    
    "Anyone who thinks that maintaining whiteness is a worthy goal is racist"
    
    I am assuming that the above applies to every other racial group.
    
    Is that assumption ok?
14. A Black Girl Says:
    July 13th, 2006 at 11:28 pm IP I think what you've taken from it is definately part of what I am trying to say. White Pride, as it has been historically "practiced" has been about supremacy based on the concept of race which is based in the ideology of white supremacy. It has been a pride based on this ideology which erases culture for white folks and excoticises it for people of color.
15. IrrationalPoint Says:
    July 14th, 2006 at 1:35 am Douglass:
    
    Yes, I think the goal of maintaining skin colour, in and of itself, is racist.
    
    I hasten to add that that is not the same as people who want to date/marry people of the same *culture*, because that's about wanting to preserve culture, which is different.
    
    ABG:
    
    I think you've made a really important point. What is the part I didn't get?
    
    --IP
16. douglass Says:
    July 14th, 2006 at 9:52 am IP wrote,
    
    "I hasten to add that that is not the same as people who want to date/marry people of the same *culture*, because that's about wanting to preserve culture, which is different."
    
    how so?
17. IrrationalPoint Says:
    July 14th, 2006 at 11:45 am Becauseof what AGB is saying: there isn't really any such thing as "white culture" or "black culture". I don't think there's anything wrong in wanting to preserve, say, American (or French or South African or Brazilian or Japanese or whatever) cultural traditions.
    
    I do think it's wrong to want to preserve white skin for the sake of whiteness, or black skin for the sake of blackness. The implication is that whiteness is somehow better than other skin colours, and that makes it racist.
    
    --IP
18. Sailorman Says:
    July 19th, 2006 at 4:43 pm (BTW, I wonder whether you're deliberately conflating "exposed" and "good," insofar as things "being exposed" is not the same as "being exposed with an overall positive prideful aspect." Ann Coulter and GWB aren't exactly a pride bonus though they get a lot of press time. But perhaps this is a side track.)
    
    In any case, I am, generally, confused as to how/why someone would be "proud" of something over which they have had absolutely no control.
    
    It seems a little like self-esteem camp: "Be proud you're a boy! Be proud you're a girl! Be proud you are ___ color! Be proud that your father did/didn't fight/avoid the ____ war!" Next thing you know it's "it's good to be a Delta!"
    
    The fates of life, and the history of my ancestors, gave me a certain starting point to work with. It had nothing to do with me. Does it make me a better person at birth if my grandmother was a liberal Native American college professor? Would I be worse if my great grandfather was a Confederate general? I can't see how.
    
    So I'm not proud of being white, or male, or a natural-born U.S. citizen--how could I be? The thought seems ridiculous. Problematically, I think it's equally ridiculous for someone to claim they're "proud" of being born black, or female, or outside the U.S.
    
    I guess I lean more towards my grandmother's philosophy: You should be proud of what you do with what you have. It's about doing, not ownership. In that philosophy, standing still is not worth much.
19. jones Says:
    September 16th, 2006 at 9:41 am as a small kid i remember being kindly admonished by my father--"you're not white, you're Irish." i was confused bec, tho i don't remember what triggered him telling me this, i guess i'd said something to indicate i had learned i was "white."

Leave a Comment