More thoughts on White Privilege in Canada
Auld Bob
Newsgroups and listening to the people who responded to that writing.
I have had to face one more way that privilege runs deep in my life,
and it makes me uncomfortable. However, the discomfort tells me I am
on the right track.
As a result, almost ever day for the past few months, I have received
many responses to my postings from people who want to talk about race.
I learned not only more about my own privilege, but more about why
many white folks can't come to terms with the truism I offered in the
posts, which is mainly that many White Canadians, whether overtly
racist or not, benefit from living in a world mostly run by white
people that has been built on the land and the backs of non-white
people.
I have also received many e-mails too. The reactions varied from
racist rantings, to deeply felt expressions
of pain and anger, to declarations of solidarity. But probably the
most important response I got was from
non-white Canadians who said something like this: "Of course there is
white privilege. I've been pointing it
out to my white friends and co-workers for years. Isn't it funny that
almost no one listens to me, but everyone takes notice when a white
guy says it."
Those comments forced me again to ponder the privilege I live with.
Who really does knows more about white privilege, me or the people on
the other side of that privilege? Me, or a non-white inner-city
teenager in Toronto, Vancouver, or Montreal who is automatically
labeled a "gang member" and feared by many white folks? Me, or a
homeless aboriginal Canadians on the streets of Calgary, Edmonton, or
Winnipeg who is invisible to many white people?. Whose voices should
we be paying attention to?
My voice gets heard in large part because I am a white male holds a
professional job with status. In most settings, I speak with the
assumption that people not only will listen, but will take me
seriously. I speak with the assumption that my motives will not be
challenged; I can rely on the perception of me as a neutral authority,
someone whose observations can be trusted.
Every time I open my mouth, I draw on, and in some ways reinforce, my
privilege, which is in large part tied to race.
Right now, I want to use that privilege to acknowledge the many non-
white people who took the time to tell me about the enduring realities
of racism in Canada. And, I want to talk to the white people who I
think misread my postings and misunderstand what's at stake.
The responses of my white critics broke down into a few basic
categories, around the following claims:
1. White privilege doesn't exist because affirmative action has made
being white a disadvantage. The simple response: Extremely limited
attempts to combat racism, such as affirmative action, do virtually
nothing to erase the white privilege built over 500 years that
pervades our society. As a friend of mine says, the only real
disadvantage to being white is that it so often prevents people from
understanding racial issues.
2. White privilege exists, but it can't be changed because it is
natural for any group to favour its own, and besides, the worst
manifestations of racism are over. Response: This approach makes human
choices appear outside of human control, which is a dodge to avoid
moral and political responsibility for the injustice we continue to
live with.
3. White privilege exists, and that's generally been a good thing
because white Europeans have civilized the world. Along the way some
bad things may have happened, and we should take care to be nice to
non-whites to make up for that. Response: These people often argued
the curiously contradictory position that (1) non-whites and their
cultures are not inferior, but (2) white/European culture is superior.
As for the civilizing effect of Europe, we might consider five
centuries of inhuman, brutal colonialism along with genocide of
Indigenous peoples, slavery, forced religious conversions, rape,
plunder, mass murder, the Holocaust, and World Wars I and II, and then
ask what "civilized" means.
4. White privilege exists because whites are inherently superior, and
I am a weakling and a traitor for suggesting otherwise. Response:
Nazism quite obviously is not dead.
There is much to say beyond those short responses, but for now I am
more interested in one common assumption that all these correspondents
made, that my comments on race and affirmative action were motivated
by "white liberal guilt." The problem is, they got two out of the
three terms wrong. I am white, but I'm not a liberal. In political
terms, I'm a radical; I don't think liberalism offers real solutions
because it doesn't attack the systems of power and structures of
illegitimate authority that are the root cause of oppression, be it
based on race, gender, sexuality, or class. These systems of
oppression, which are enmeshed and interlocking, require radical
solutions.
While it is certainly true that white people are sometimes the victims
of racism or racism occurs between different people of colour, these
incidents fail in comparison to the number of people of colour who
are
victimized by institutionalized white racism; it's not hard to see
where the real problem lays. While it is important to oppose racism
against white people, there is most certainly nothing inherently
wrong
or racist in pointing out the facts of institutional and societal
white racism and white privilege. It is also important to expose and
oppose unearned white male privilege which continues to victimize
women, visible minorities, aboriginals, and people with disabilities.
Racism against white people and racism between different people of
colour should always be condemned and denounced. Furthermore, racism
between different white ethnic groups such as anti-Francophone bigotry
and anti-Anglophone bigotry should always be condemned and opposed. As
a White Anglo Saxon Protestant male myself, I am very much aware of
the level of anti-Francophone bigotry which exists in Anglophone
Canada and particularly amongst fellow White Anglo Saxon Protestant
males. However, I am still proud of my ethnicity, culture, and
heritage and I make no apologizes for it.
And I don't feel guilty. Guilt is appropriate when one has wronged
another, when one has something to feel guilty about. In my life I
have felt guilty for racist or sexist things I have said or done, even
when they were done unconsciously. But that is guilt I felt because of
specific acts, not for the colour of my skin. Also, focusing on
individual guilt feelings is counterproductive when it leads us to
ponder the issue from a psychological point of view instead of a moral
and political one.
So, I cannot, and indeed should not, feel either guilty or proud about
being white, because it is a state of being I have no control over.
However, as a member of a society--and especially as a privileged
member of society--I have an obligation not simply to enjoy that
privilege that comes with being white but to study and understand it,
and work toward a more just world in which such unearned privilege is
eliminated.
While it is certainly true that white people are sometimes the victims
of racism or racism occurs between different people of colour, these
incidents fail in comparison to the number of people of colour who
are
victimized by institutionalized white racism; it's not hard to see
where the real problem lays.
Furthermore, it is a fact that many white men including former
Progressive Conservative Party of Canada leader and Prime Minister Joe
Clark have fought hard to bring about anti-discrimination measures
and
equality of opportunity for women, visible minorities, aboriginals,
and peoples with disabilities. Other examples of this are former
Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario leaders and premiers John
Robarts and Bill Davis, who did a great deal of excellent work to
bring about equality, fairness, and human rights in areas such as
employment, education, and housing to their Province of Ontario. The
vast majority of Canadian white males and white women do not agree
with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper's institutionalized racism
and sexism; and wish to see greater equality of opportunity and a fair
share of representation in elected public life for historically
oppressed and discriminated against groups such as women (both white
and non-white alike), visible minorities, aboriginals, and peoples
with disabilities.
My critics should keep in mind that this issue is not about white men
or any other gender or skin colour of people being racist at all, it
is about unearned white privilege in society.
Some of my critics said that such a goal is ridiculous; after all,
people have unearned privileges of all kinds. Several people pointed
out that, for example, tall people have unearned privilege in
basketball, and we don't ask tall people to stop playing basketball
nor do we eliminate their advantage.
The obvious difference is that racial categories are invented; they
carry privilege or disadvantage only because people with power create
and maintain the privilege for themselves at the expense of others.
The privilege is rooted in violence and is maintained through that
violence as well as more subtle means.
I can't change the world so that everyone is the same height, so that
everyone has the same shot at being
a pro basketball player. In fact, I wouldn't want to; it would be a
drab and boring world if we could erase individual differences like
that. But I can work with others to change the world to erase the
effects of differences that have been created by one group to keep
others down.
What matters is what we decide to do with the white privilege. For me,
that means speaking, knowing that
I speak with a certain unearned privilege that gives me advantages I
cannot justify.
It also means listening when an elderly black gentleman or a lady from
India who reads my postings to these internets Newsgroups, e-mails me
to thank me and share their painful experiences of dealing with racism
in Canada with me. The gentleman in particular who has lived with more
kinds of racism than I can imagine through more decades than I have
been alive, says to me, "White privilege, yes, good to keep an eye on
that, son. Keep yourself honest. But don't forget to pay attention to
the folks who live without the privilege."
It takes only a bit of empathy to listen, and a bit of courage to act.
It is important that all Canadians both white and non-white alike
unite and join together to fight unearned privilege and
institutionalized racism where ever it may occur.
Rich
white.
Maxje
"Rich" <rande...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1c66879e-1cb4-481b...@g1g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> Went to the post office today. 8 people working there, none of them
> white.
... because they were all temporary workers without a contract, I bet (temp
workers).
CUPE and LCUC members are mostly white, making $50K a year + , handling and
delivering cheap marketing materials (pizza menus, sears' sales` catalogue
sand other cheap non requested garbage, filling up our mail boxes (most of
us belong to the electronic age).
And as these priviledged militants, who have milked the taxpayers in more
crucial times with Canada wide strike,s retire with benefits that they have
blackmailed from the taxpayers, more and more underpaid minorities will take
over while being paid for the true value, (dirt cheap) of postal services
that haven't been taken over by the private sector.
Coming out of troubled economic times, where most of us have been screwed by
whites ruling over the financial sector, isn't about time that you take off
your coloured glasses?
And by the way, I'm white and of european descent. Was your umbilical cord
around your neck when you were vaginally expulsed?
Scotius
<fraeoldbob...@gmail.com> wrote:
>By writing about the politics of white privilege on Internet
>Newsgroups and listening to the people who responded to that writing.
>I have had to face one more way that privilege runs deep in my life,
>and it makes me uncomfortable. However, the discomfort tells me I am
>on the right track.
I don't think you're simple in any way Bob, not that my
opinion would matter to you, but that DOES seem at least like a simple
viewpoint. Do I take it to mean that the more discomfort you feel
personally, the more you believe you're on "the right track".
>
>As a result, almost ever day for the past few months, I have received
>many responses to my postings from people who want to talk about race.
>I learned not only more about my own privilege, but more about why
>many white folks can't come to terms with the truism I offered in the
>posts, which is mainly that many White Canadians, whether overtly
>racist or not, benefit from living in a world mostly run by white
>people that has been built on the land and the backs of non-white
>people.
How so? Canada was not built on the backs of non-Whites bob.
You could say the Southern US was built on the backs of Blacks, but
you certainly cannot say Canada was.
Further, do you believe that Whites rule the World? There are
a lot more people of colour making decisions of importance in Canada
than there are White people doing it in Saudi Arabia, India, or China,
I can guarrantee you, and neither the governments of those nations nor
there people would allow it to be different.
Why should we think that there's something wrong with us that
isn't with others? That's not the case.
>
>I have also received many e-mails too. The reactions varied from
>racist rantings, to deeply felt expressions
>of pain and anger, to declarations of solidarity. But probably the
>most important response I got was from
>non-white Canadians who said something like this: "Of course there is
>white privilege. I've been pointing it
>out to my white friends and co-workers for years. Isn't it funny that
>almost no one listens to me, but everyone takes notice when a white
>guy says it."
>
>Those comments forced me again to ponder the privilege I live with.
I feel like saying "Ah yes... your terrible burden; SPARE
ME!...", but I won't. You may be sincere, which is all the more reason
for me to be concerned for your sanity.
>Who really does knows more about white privilege, me or the people on
>the other side of that privilege? Me, or a non-white inner-city
>teenager in Toronto, Vancouver, or Montreal who is automatically
>labeled a "gang member"
I don't think non-Whites in inner cities are labelled "gang
members", and I don't think they get harrassed by "the man" any more
than heavy metal fans did when that music was new (and it was mostly
White kids listening to it).
>and feared by many white folks? Me, or a
>homeless aboriginal Canadians on the streets of Calgary, Edmonton, or
>Winnipeg who is invisible to many white people?. Whose voices should
>we be paying attention to?
>
>My voice gets heard in large part because I am a white male holds a
>professional job with status. In most settings, I speak with the
>assumption that people not only will listen, but will take me
>seriously.
Well, I'd like to, but I've read quite a few of your posts...
>I speak with the assumption that my motives will not be
>challenged; I can rely on the perception of me as a neutral authority,
>someone whose observations can be trusted.
>
>Every time I open my mouth, I draw on, and in some ways reinforce, my
>privilege, which is in large part tied to race.
>
>Right now, I want to use that privilege to acknowledge the many non-
>white people who took the time to tell me about the enduring realities
>of racism in Canada. And, I want to talk to the white people who I
>think misread my postings and misunderstand what's at stake.
>
>The responses of my white critics broke down into a few basic
>categories, around the following claims:
>
>1. White privilege doesn't exist because affirmative action has made
>being white a disadvantage.
Well, that's a crock, and you could easily refute a ridiculous
claim like that, so why make more of it than you need to in order to
make your point?
>The simple response: Extremely limited
>attempts to combat racism, such as affirmative action, do virtually
>nothing to erase the white privilege built over 500 years that
>pervades our society.
That's probably true, but it never really was intended to do
that, was it?
Affirmative action, at least in the US, seems to be a tool by
which the people who want things the way they once were to stir up
resenment against the people it's supposedly supposed to help.
If you were Black, and your parents couldn't afford to send
you to college because they didn't have the same opportunities when
they were younger that a lot of White people did, then there certainly
should be some sort of assistance for you. However, while the
assistance exists in the US, the people who provide it seem to make
sure that whatever lies David Duke and others choose to tell about it
go unchallenged. I'm not sure AffAct ais really designed to help.
>As a friend of mine says, the only real
>disadvantage to being white is that it so often prevents people from
>understanding racial issues.
I don't think that's true, nor do I think that White people
are solely to blame for all "race issues".
>
>2. White privilege exists, but it can't be changed because it is
>natural for any group to favour its own, and besides, the worst
>manifestations of racism are over. Response: This approach makes human
>choices appear outside of human control, which is a dodge to avoid
>moral and political responsibility for the injustice we continue to
>live with.
>
>3. White privilege exists, and that's generally been a good thing
>because white Europeans have civilized the world. Along the way some
>bad things may have happened, and we should take care to be nice to
>non-whites to make up for that. Response: These people often argued
>the curiously contradictory position that (1) non-whites and their
>cultures are not inferior, but (2) white/European culture is superior.
>As for the civilizing effect of Europe, we might consider five
>centuries of inhuman, brutal colonialism along with genocide of
>Indigenous peoples, slavery, forced religious conversions, rape,
>plunder, mass murder, the Holocaust, and World Wars I and II, and then
>ask what "civilized" means.
A friend of mine recently told me that Europeans "civilized"
the natives here in Canada. It's a crock, but he seems to believe it.
>
>4. White privilege exists because whites are inherently superior, and
>I am a weakling and a traitor for suggesting otherwise. Response:
>Nazism quite obviously is not dead.
>
>There is much to say beyond those short responses, but for now I am
>more interested in one common assumption that all these correspondents
>made, that my comments on race and affirmative action were motivated
>by "white liberal guilt." The problem is, they got two out of the
>three terms wrong. I am white, but I'm not a liberal. In political
>terms, I'm a radical; I don't think liberalism offers real solutions
>because it doesn't attack the systems of power and structures of
>illegitimate authority that are the root cause of oppression,
Power corrupts. If you are naive enough to believe that people
who believe as you do would be an inherently more honest government
than the one we've got, I have to disagree with you.
I like Obama, but since he got into office he's become the guy
who's doing GW Bush's third term in the most important respect,
meaning the bank bailouts.
Is he a better man than Bush? Inarguably, yes. Is he
continuing to try to clean the same mess by making more of it?
Unfortunately also yes.
We don't need a government of "Auld Bobs" any more than we
need the idiots we have there. Sorry, but that's just the way it is,
although I do believe your intentions are somewhat less harmful than
simply being pro-business, anti-middle class.
It should be noted however that I do believe you would
probably do at least as much damage to the middle class, despite not
intending to.
>be it
>based on race, gender, sexuality,
Sorry. I just don't go for the pro-gay stuff. I'm not
anti-gay, but I don't think the "gay movement" needs to make the world
safe for themselves by pushing "education" about their "lifestyle"
throughout the educational system, etc. I think that's ridiculous.
Also, the jury is still out (and not of the closet) one
whether sexuality is a matter of biology or behavioural choices. I'm
not going to say one way or the other, since I don't know for sure,
but I don't really care. There are plenty of decent gay people, I just
don't think we need to be extra-super-sensitive to them in every
regard. No one's that sensitive to me, nor do I want people to be. The
day may come when heterosexual people think the world should be more
sensitive to US. Turning things upside down from where they are now is
not a solution Bob. Sorry.
I also don't like people talking about bigotry against ethnic
minorities in the same breath as gays; it's not even the same KIND of
issue let alone exactly the same thing, and people who insist it is
need to quit pretending to believe that.
>or class. These systems of
>oppression, which are enmeshed and interlocking, require radical
>solutions.
>
>While it is certainly true that white people are sometimes the victims
>of racism or racism occurs between different people of colour, these
>incidents fail in comparison to the number of people of colour who
>are
>victimized by institutionalized white racism; it's not hard to see
>where the real problem lays. While it is important to oppose racism
>against white people, there is most certainly nothing inherently
>wrong
>or racist in pointing out the facts of institutional and societal
>white racism and white privilege. It is also important to expose and
>oppose unearned white male privilege which continues to victimize
>women, visible minorities, aboriginals, and people with disabilities.
>Racism against white people and racism between different people of
>colour should always be condemned and denounced. Furthermore, racism
>between different white ethnic groups such as anti-Francophone bigotry
>and anti-Anglophone bigotry should always be condemned and opposed.
Yes, but I don't recall you once having criticized
anti-Anglophone bigotry in, oh, say for example, QUEBEC. There's more
of it there than there is anti-Francophone bigotry in the rest of the
country, but the rest of us don't whine incessantly about it.
>As
>a White Anglo Saxon Protestant male myself, I am very much aware of
>the level of anti-Francophone bigotry which exists in Anglophone
>Canada and particularly amongst fellow White Anglo Saxon Protestant
>males. However, I am still proud of my ethnicity, culture, and
>heritage and I make no apologizes for it.
>
>And I don't feel guilty. Guilt is appropriate when one has wronged
>another, when one has something to feel guilty about. In my life I
>have felt guilty for racist or sexist things I have said or done, even
>when they were done unconsciously. But that is guilt I felt because of
>specific acts, not for the colour of my skin. Also, focusing on
>individual guilt feelings is counterproductive when it leads us to
>ponder the issue from a psychological point of view instead of a moral
>and political one.
>
>So, I cannot, and indeed should not, feel either guilty or proud about
>being white, because it is a state of being I have no control over.
Would you tell someone who's Black that it's wrong to be proud
of being Black? I think if you did, you'd be wrong, just as I think
you'd be wrong to tell anyone White that it's wrong to be proud of
their heritage in the same way.
But what I really want to know is this: Would you tell one of
the freaks at a gay pride parade that if that's how they express it,
do they realize they're idiots, and do they realize that they will
certainly set their movement back 10 years minimum with every such
"celebration"? Yes, I mean that somewhat humorously, but mostly
seriously.
>However, as a member of a society--and especially as a privileged
>member of society--I have an obligation not simply to enjoy that
>privilege that comes with being white but to study and understand it,
>and work toward a more just world in which such unearned privilege is
>eliminated.
That was a big part of what the communists promised, and of
course then formed their own little party elite which was worse than
the previous regimes'.
Who are you to pretend that you're above the temptations of
unearned priveledge to the degree that you think you could eliminate
it from the country, and simply be a selfless servant of the people.
That kind of claptrap belongs in the dream bin along with other stuff
that's more likely to turn into a nightmare not only for the people
whose unearned priveledge you oppose, but also for those in whose name
you'd be opposing it.
>
>While it is certainly true that white people are sometimes the victims
>of racism or racism occurs between different people of colour, these
>incidents fail in comparison to the number of people of colour who
>are
>victimized by institutionalized white racism;
In Canada, yes. In India, any racism by Whites (the few that
live there) would pale in comparison to the institutionalized Indian
racism, not only against non-Indians, but even against Indians such as
the "Dalits".
By the way, the "upper caste" Indians are probably the worst
abusers of unearned priveledge on Earth, in case you didn't know. Just
ask a Dalit if you don't believe me, like the one who was burned
because she wouldn't consent to be raped by one of the villagers who
was in one of those "upper class" castes.
Why don't you ask someone from one of the Southeast Asian
nations what they think of the Japanese businessmen... especially the
ones that built a whole community unto themselves in Indonesia, so
they wouldn't have to pal around with those dirty Indonesians when
they wanted to party. Literally, they built their own town so they
could keep to themselves.
Why not ask people who visit China about institutionalized
Chinese racism against all others, even to the point of charging
foreigners more for anything they purchase as a matter of course?
And of course Japan, China, and India are populated almost
entirely by Japanese, Chinese, and Indians, yet you make no demands
that they allow immigration to their countries to increase, especially
the non-Japanese, non-Chinese, and non-Indian immigrants. Why not?
And what about the Arab world? You couldn't find 1,000 White
people in Riyahd, although there are more than that many there working
for the Saudi government in various capacities, but just try to
suggest that they be acknowledged as culturally different, and should
have some leeway in various areas. You'd be whipped if you suggested
that openly, and that's if you're lucky.
I understand the pain that many tall people go through. I put
a video camera mounted to a height extender on myself a while back and
went to a restaurant. Not only did I have a lot of trouble reading the
menu, since it was so far away from my virtual viewpoint, but when I
went to the bathroom I could hardly manoever at all. I feel their
pain...
That's all good and well, but if you were to have your way, I
suspect, you'd set up a government promising many of the same things
the communists did, and of course they set up their own elite, which I
believe you would also, and would be mistaken. Good intentions with
the potential for disaster need to have a keen eye kept on them too.