I think the discussion is important, though. Since we were raised in this toxic, unhealthy culture, we can’t just take the things we were taught at face value. We have to go through our cultural baggage and ask, “Is this something good that I can take on my rewilding journey or will it hold me back?”
“Does this help me reconnect with the humans and non-humans around me or does it put barriers between us?”
[quote=“incomplete, post:20, topic:1525”]On the other hand, i think for been “completely correct” we could well use the Hawaiian term “haole”.
For me, culturally, the biggest differences are between who is civilized, who wants not to be and who is not.[/quote]
I agree. Personally I resonate with the Native American term wetiko to describe the civilized mindset/culture. It basically translates to “cannibal”, meaning one who consumes others’ lives for personal gain - in a toxic, abusive way as opposed to a healthy way, which would be eating others (plants & animals) with respect and love. I recently read the book “Columbus and Other Cannibals” by Jack Forbes (highly highly recommended), where he uses the term to denote a mental/spiritual/cultural sickness, that is spread and infects people like any other disease.
wetiko then
there is no day i dont learn something new
yeah, if i start to work again i will for sure buy this one
I think that the belief in race is Racism, the belief in states is Statism, nations Nationalism, and belief in humans (as opposed to all other life, if necessary), Humanist. I personally believe in tribes. I am a Tribalist. “Anglo-saxon” is a racial term, but “caucasian” just means someone from the Caucasus Mountains area (Georgia, Armenia, etc). For reference, here is a map of tribal territory in “England” just before the Normans conquered them and dissolved the tribal boundaries: http://www8.georgetown.edu/departments/medieval/labyrinth/library/oe/texts/hidage.html
I have a problem with the statement, “I don’t believe in race.” That statement erases the experience of people of color who live in civilization.
I agree. A great blog post on this subject articulates the reason why better than I could - http://whitepriv.blogspot.com/2006/09/little-white-lie-im-not-racist-im.html:
To be "colorblind" is to neglect a fundamental part of humanism: of the many realities we exist in, the most compelling, consuming, and dire reality, is our social reality. It is the reality that will determine our fate.While race is not a biological reality, it is a social one. Not seeing color is to not see reality; it is to not see adversity. Colorblindness is a fantasy world in which we don't truly know one another. It would seem then that to not see someone's struggles (struggles often related to race) is to not see them at all.…Colorblindness implies also that since we are all the same, we have all had equal opportunity. This implication has lead to enormous power diffentials economically and politically that persist to this day.
It is doubtful that we can achieve a genuine equality without dealing honestly with our social reality. The social reality is that we are a diverse human family and that race affects every aspect of our lives. White people often have a hard time seeing this. It is as if they are blind.
How much color is color? Irish was just as bad as black at one point. Further, the disbelief in race doesnt “erase” the enslavement, discrimination, etc., it just paints it in a new light. The african-descended population in the US and other American countries are just as descended from tribes as anyone else and their culture shows this in many ways. The fact that they are now one people only puts them in the ranks of Metis, Mestizo and other groups of urbanized and de-cultured victims of civilization steam-rolling.
Putting all “people of color” together is imo of very limited usefulness and often hides important details and differences.
You’re right. It does not literally erase people’s experiences. It just gives the impression that they don’t matter and are not worthy of discussion.
In a general discussion of race, the term “people of color” is shorthand for “people who have experienced discrimination based on their skin color.” I use it because it seems to be the preferred terminology at this time. I think ethnicity is a separate issue from race, although of course the two are related.
Good for you, you’re “enlightened” enough to ignore race.
But understanding that race is a cultural construct doesn’t change the fact that cultural constructs have real effects. The anthropological community for the most part took that stance for decades, and in doing so missed the chance to affect real change and contribute to the discourse.
Just because you recognize something is a delusion doesn’t mean you can ignore it. Race is real because people make it real. Recognizing that it has effects is also not the same as believing in it.
And am I the only one who notices that it’s only ever white folks who make that sort of statement? It’s easy to ignore the effects of a cultural construct when you’re the one benefiting from it.
Exactly.
I’m reminded of a sample in a Dead Prez song (don’t know who is speaking, possibly a Black Panther), where someone says:
“I’m born black, I live black, and I’m gonna die, partly because I’m black, because some cracker that knows I’m black, better than you nigga, is probably gonna put a bullet in the back of my head.” (I’ve tried to write it as accurately as I can).
What I’ve heard from people of color is that they are constantly reminded, every day, of their “race”, because of their actual experiences living in this racist culture. It is not an abstraction to them, it is real, lived experience. Personally, I don’t want the concept of race to have meaning in the real world, any more than I want to be racist. But I have to acknowledge the racism inherent in this culture and how it affects people (some negatively and others positively, depending on one’s perceived “race”), the same that I have to acknowledge the racism inside me due to my enculturation, that I’ll probably spend the rest of my life trying to get rid of.
And am I the only one who notices that it's only ever white folks who make that sort of statement?nope.
I think it’s hard for white people to talk about race because we’re so afraid of being perceived as racist. The first step is to recognize that you have privilege and admit your own ignorance. The book “Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria” by Beverly Tatum is a great primer on race issues, IMO.
I wonder if there’s a point where we can talk about individual prejudice and discrimination and de-emphasize the group thing. Because here’s what it looks like to me: people are not supposed to use race as a factor in their judgment of another person (and face it, we all have to judge people all day long, whether as a potential threat, potential friend, potential employee, or whatever), and yet the message is that “blacks” are discriminated against by “whites” in terrible ways constantly. While this is true, and I’m not suggesting a coverup of the truth, does it not, as a final definition of the situation, perpetuate a division based on group identity?
This is how I feel about feminism as well. If feminists in one corner continually berate the “bad boys” in the other corner for treating them badly, then isn’t the male/female divide just going to get deeper? What if there were a group of people, male and female, black and white, who insisted that people be judged individually? Because seriously, does every single black person consider the entire population of blacks as their people? I, being female, certainly do not consider the entire population of females as my people. I, being white, feel far more connection to and affiliation with my neighbors, black, white and Hmong, than I do with people on the other side of town of any race or ethnicity. If you picked out a random white female in the world and one of my black male neighbors and said, “We’re going to give $1,000 to one of these people, which one?” I’d definitely pick my neighbor. I am completely judging them based on the fact that they are part of my community, and the other person is not. So what if the focus is on building connections and community, instead of standing on a side of the fence that has been built based on skin color, heritage, genitalia, height, class, or any other box that can be checked on an employment application?
In my ideal world, people could certainly talk about how those details of their person affect their experience, and of course join together with anyone they wished to get their story out, but in the end there would be some kind of acknowledgment that a person’s integrity, words and actions are what truly matters, above and beyond the personal details they cannot control. I envision some kind of larger belonging, to a rational and loving humanity, that preserves the identity of whatever smaller affiliations have coalesced, supports their smaller group objectives and welcomes the strength of their perspective, but also ultimately affirms the rights of individuals beyond any particular characteristics.
Post-civ, I think this might be easier, because if we were small tribes focused on survival, encountering other groups with a similar goal, we would certainly have an immediate common ground to stand on, and all other details would end up in the background. Whereas now, the artificial structure of civilization affords us the alienating luxury of inflating the importance of particular details that might otherwise take a back seat to genuine needs and connections.
Mama-love, regarding what we need to move towards (the kind of society/community/worldview we want to create), what you say sounds right on. But I see that as a different question than that of examining the reality of our society, the way it is right now (and why). Only if we acknowledge and clearly examine the latter, unflinchingly and honestly, can the former even become possible. And I don’t mean a passing, one-time acknowledgment, but a daily, continual examination - understanding that we ourselves are products of the current racist reality, and we will never be able to completely get away from that as long as we live. In other words, decolonizing/rewilding ourselves is a lifelong process.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that we should totally work towards the ideal future we want to create, while at the same time understanding that we will never completely reach that goal in our lifetime, because completely undoing the racist underpinnings of modern society (rooted in thousands of years of civilized history) is a task that will span many generations. Thus the need for a continual acknowledgment and examination of the way things currently are, to make forward progress toward our goal possible.
I read a blog post a few years ago and in it a (white) mother talked about wanting to shelter her child from the knowledge that people discriminate against one another based on race, sexual orientation, etc. She wanted him to only see the good in the world instead of acknowledging painful truths. I can understand the impulse. No parent wants to see their child hurting or unhappy. But, to my mind, sheltering a child in that way is counterproductive. A parents job is teach the child how to live in the world, and giving them a false sense of well being doesn’t achieve that. In order to have empathy for others, we have to understand what they go through.
[quote=“bereal, post:30, topic:1525”]I’m reminded of a sample in a Dead Prez song (don’t know who is speaking, possibly a Black Panther), where someone says:
“I’m born black, I live black, and I’m gonna die, partly because I’m black, because some cracker that knows I’m black, better than you nigga, is probably gonna put a bullet in the back of my head.” (I’ve tried to write it as accurately as I can). [/quote]
This quote is actually from a Movie, “The Spook Who Sat By the Door” - a very awesome movie, highly recommend it. Anyhow, the interesting thing about this quote that you won’t see from the text, is the character saying it is a very light skinned person. I’ll let you draw your own thoughts/conclusions from there.
Here’s a clip of it.
I think the relative darkness of their skin is beside the point. The point is the racism inherent in society - the fact that racist white people consider him “other” (“black”), and treat him accordingly, totally irrespective of the fact that he doesn’t actually look very dark. My great-grandparents were totally white (Romanian), and yet the Ku Klux Klan considered them “other” enough that they burned a cross in front of their house.