« THE MICHELLE OBAMA WHITEY VIDEO REVEALED!!! | Main | Why I've never read Thomas Sowell »

Message to the White Man: We're not thinking about you

08 Jun 2008 11:06 pm

If there is one thing I'd like my white readers to get out of this blog, it is some sense of the great diversity of opinion and sensibility which exist within black America. One of the most poisonous ideas to emerge out of the cultural wars of the 80s and 90s was this portrait of black America as a hotbed of radical leftists who spend their days berating Jews, demanding reparations, and thinking of new and exciting ways to make white folks feel guilty. I think that image has come to dominate because so many public intellectuals working in the arena of race began to confuse the debates occurring in the sociology departments of elite campuses and in the salons of the Upper West Side, with the debates that rank and file black folks have amongst themselves. No disrespect, but New York City and the Ivy Leagues may be the most distortive influences on the picture of black life, short of BET.

I say that as an avowed liberal and lefty, who has his roots in the black nationalist communities. Obviously I'd love it if large swaths of black America were obsessed with social and racial justice, but take it from someone who spent many a day trying to make that a reality, it just isn't the case. This is important because a key measure of humanity is the right to be wrong, the right to be complicated, to be contradictory. Just as America can at once be the first enlightenment republic and still carry with it a long legacy of white supremacy, black people can be the greatest engine for social change in this country history, and still believe that gay marriage should be banned. I obviously have huge problems with the latter half of that equation, but once you see that, within a group, political views can diverge all kinds of ways, it becomes foolish to define a group strictly by those views.

This leads me to the latest backward attempt to analyze Barack Obama and race. I think the MSM, frankly, needs to just give up on this whole topic, their record is disastrous. First Obama wasn't black enough. Then he was so black that he couldn't win the nomination. Now the question is "How black is too black?" Lemme explain something to you, dog: I just watched a black man carry Iowa and Oregon and then carry roughly nine out of ten black voters. Don't give me that business about Appalachia. You know damn well if I had told you three years ago that a black man would do that you would have laughed at me. With that backdrop I've gotta say, I don't even know what the phrase "too black" means.

One thing I do know, the Times definition of blackness--"a sense of black grievance"--is a joke. And if it weren't Al Sharpton would have dominated the black vote. That sort of flat rendering of black America, keep up this false idea that the most unifying factor of black culture is the ability to make white people feel guilty. Look, I know this is tough to believe, but black people aren't nearly as obsessed with white people, as media would have you think. Fueling that notion is  a cheap and easy way to fill some column inches, while not giving a flying fuck about stripping the humanity and complexity away from black folks. I should have known it was over when I saw the headline, but the dead giveway that I was in the midst of a half-hearted effort was here:

Mr. Obama’s campaign so de-emphasized race that for most of the 17-month nomination contest much of the news media became obsessed with the question of whether he was “black enough” to win black votes.

What a crock. Obama emphasized race about as much as most black people on the street emphasize race. What these intellectuals can't see is that the same issues that keep white folks up at night--the war, the economy, health care--are the same damn issues that keep black folks up at night. And I love the tautological bit about the news media obsessing over whether Obama is black enough. DUDE, YOU ARE THE NEWS MEDIA. You obsess over it because you're too lazy to ask the hard questions about Obama and race.

I love that the talking heads now think that they are the arbiters of what is and ain't black. These folks wouldn't be able to do the Electric Slide if you gave them a take-home DVD, can't pick Kenya Moore out of a lineup, ain't never set foot on the campus of an HBCU (don't even know what it stands for), and these cats are gonna tell us what's "too black" and what ain't. Come on man. Humor me a little, at least. Listen to some Isaac Hayes records. Then let's talk.

UPDATE:
Commenter Herb offers a solid critique:

While you skate pretty close to "white people just don't get it" territory, you make some good points. As a white guy who doesn't line dance (not even the Achy Break Heart), never heard of Kenya Moore (thanks for educating me on that one), and lives in a state with no HBCUs, I can say that I am an absolute outsider to the black experience.

I'm still not willing to wall off aspects of culture based on race. I find the "whites only" mentality from years past as offensive as the "blacks only" mentality you sometimes see today. (Exhibit #1 of what I mean by the "blacks only" mentality: The N word. Hey, us white people want to sing along to our rap records too!)

I think the best way to get past racism is to acknowledge that race is largely meaningless. There's no white culture or black culture. There's just culture.

Yup, I don't believe in the "white people just don't get it" line of thinking. Half of what I know about black people I learned from white people. I'm talking about Peter Guralnick, Nicholas Lehmann, Kate Boo and Dan Baum. These are cats who treated black folks like actual human beings, who did not sit in apartments or in television studios pontificating and acting like they'd spent time learning the mores of black people, when, at best, all they'd done is read John Ridley's latest in Esquire. This ain't racial at all. I find Juan Williams about as ignorant about the current state of black folks as Pat Buchanan. I also think the author of this "What is too black" piece was black himself.

As for the point about culture, I don't believe in "racial" culture either. But much as Jews exist as a religious group and an ethnic group, blacks exist as a racial group (ugh, as much as race exists) but more importantly as an ethnic group. There is no universal white culture--but there is an Italian-American culture, a Jewish American culture, an Upper West Side culture, a white Southern culture, an Appalachian Scots-Irish culture etc. And all of those are tributaries feeding into the broader American culture. Black folks are the same way. The culture isn't race-based--anybody who spends some time studying, and is equipped with some measure of empathy, can get it. But my problem is people who don't want to put in that time, but then want to go out and make blanket statements about "What Black Is," if I may paraphrase Brother Jay.

It's like, am I not black because I don't sit around thinking about "black grievance"? If blackness is based on "black grievance," how did Barack grab 90 percent of the black vote when he spent most of his time talking about the collective needs of the country? Why is Bill Cosby one of the most popular figures, among black people, in this country? Why did Barack deploy Oprah to South Carolina? Are these people, now, not black?

There is great hypocrisy here: The same mofos who jump on the necks of urban youth for playing the "not black enough" game, will gladly turn the tables and pull the same shit on Barack Obama. If it's pathological for a sixth grader to tease another kid for being "too white," then its equally pathological to bloviate in the Times about whether Barack Obama is "too black."

Comments (36)

While you skate pretty close to "white people just don't get it" territory, you make some good points. As a white guy who doesn't line dance (not even the Achy Break Heart), never heard of Kenya Moore (thanks for educating me on that one), and lives in a state with no HBCUs, I can say that I am an absolute outsider to the black experience.

I'm still not willing to wall off aspects of culture based on race. I find the "whites only" mentality from years past as offensive as the "blacks only" mentality you sometimes see today. (Exhibit #1 of what I mean by the "blacks only" mentality: The N word. Hey, us white people want to sing along to our rap records too!)

I think the best way to get past racism is to acknowledge that race is largely meaningless. There's no white culture or black culture. There's just culture.

(Exhibit #1 of what I mean by the "blacks only" mentality: The N word. Hey, us white people want to sing along to our rap records too!)
------------------------------------------------
...and you were doing so well up to that point.

hey man. i like your blog.there is something that has been bothering me and would love for you to address. Up until Iowa, Obama was trailing Clinton amongst African-Americans but after he won there this changed. One of the reasons that has been given for this is the notion that he 'proved' he can win. But another implication seems to be that black people needed permission from white folks to vote for him. That seems problematic, doesn't it? your thoughts please......

Thanks for this. My wife and I (both white women) were reading this article over coffee and asking ourselves what Ta-Nehisi would have to say about it on Monday. My favorite part: "Mr. Wright spewed exactly the kind of angry racial repudiation..." -- "spewed" is a pretty loaded word. I'm so irked that the MSM has settled into a comfortable conclusion that Wright is a maniac.

"If it's pathological for a sixth grader to tease another kid for being "too white," then its equally pathological to bloviate in the Times about whether Barack Obama is "too black.""

Absolutely. That no one asked if good ole boy Mike Huckabee was "too white" for urban voters lends credence to the hypocrisy theory.

Also, P6, I should clarify that I have no desire to use that word. I recognize its hurtful nature, especially coming from a white person.

I also recognize that calling it taboo should not mean "okay for me, but not for you."

Besides, I'm a heavy metal guy and it's not so prominent in their lyrics. It's all demons and war and pain. But when I want to jam to DMX, I gotta do it radio-edit style or risk coming off as a jackass. And that's lame.

***But another implication seems to be that black people needed permission from white folks to vote for him.***

Let's put that ugly idea to rest.

Iowa was a turning point because it showed the country--black and white--that Obama COULD DO IT. Recall all the negative media at the time; over and again we heard the memes that the Clinton machine was unstoppable, and Americans just would not vote for a black guy with a funny name. I (white) had friends telling me the same thing: "he'll NEVER win the general, there's no way America is ready for a black president, what about the heartland," blah blah blah. Why give up the Clinton "sure thing" to take such a risk?

Although I had favored Obama over Clinton, I was affected by all that dubiousness...when the primary came to my state, would it make any sense to back Obama? Would I help to hand the Republicans yet another Presidency out of misplaced idealism and naivete?

Iowa changed all that. If it was a powerful moment for me--why YES HE CAN--I can't begin to imagine how affecting it must have been for persons of color.

More X-Clan quotes on this blog please.

Thanks.

Herb:

I also recognize that calling it taboo should not mean "okay for me, but not for you."
----------------------------------------------------------
It often does. That's not limited to Black folk; all in-groups have their private gestures.

That's life. Nothing to be done about it.

Mr. Coates-
Just a request from a cubicle-jockey on a coffee break: When you're critiquing some product of academic work, at least attach the name of a scholar or a department. I know it's not always practical within the confines of a post, but Ivory Tower strawmen are soft targets. Especially the Ivy Leaguers.

Also, nice turn on Sullivan's blog a while back. I've been reading on-and-off ever since.

Ta-Nehisi,
For what its worth. You just earned a spot in my daily read. Saw you guest blog over at Yglesias, and have been really impressed. Great post.

Big fan of your work. Thank you.

I do think you are saying there are complexities to the black community, just like any community and you are, to some extent railing against a press and a narrative that paints blacks as one dimensional. I get this. BUT, the underlying difficulty of whites talking about being "black in America" sort of points to another issue. This idea that there is no "racial culture" but there is "ethnic culture" makes a lot of sense to me. "Culture" is such a loaded word in our discourse ... but there ARE traits/characteristics/similarities within groups that are identifiable with that group. I can tell you that it never ceases to amaze me how many people go through a litany of their favorite foods from my ethnic group or tell me the most tenuous connections they have had with someone who shares my ethnicity. And I get this all the time "Are you all just like My Big Fat Greek Wedding?". For myself, I see this as an attempt to connect. Now, it would be downright weird for me if, once I met you, I told you I knew another black journalist once! This points to the limitations in the analogy of ethnic groups. BUT, I still think it is a useful way to analyze the issue.

Anyway, I see your comments as sort of coming from two different places at once -- you are saying that there is not a singular "black voice" that the MSM can know but then you are also saying, in effect, that you can discern "blackness". I am not sure those two points of view help anything. Based on my experiences, I see the black ethnic groups as different groups. And I can not imagine that an individual who grew up like Obama, say, does not see himself as the same "group" as the inner city kid (let's disregard the greater view of all individuals are in the same group for this discussion). Now, where it gets too laced with race for me, is if one would say that Obama, because of his race, can relate to the inner-city kid better than me. This gets tricky. From my conversations, I have heard that I can never really understand the subtle reactions black people get all the time. If this is true, then it follows that those who share that experience really understand it. If that is true, then, too some extent, there is a sentiment that "white people just can't get it". You specifically point out that empathetic people can "get it" so I know there is great respect for the individuals ability to ignore his/her demographic. Still, it is all so friggin tricky in this country. As they say round here, thanks for lissinin'

Oopsie daisy: Sentence should read:

And I can not imagine that an individual who grew up like Obama, say, sees himself in the same "group" as the inner city kid (let's disregard the greater view of all individuals are in the same group for this discussion).

Benjamin,

Point taken, my friend.

Hi, I can't quite remember who said that the N word is considered a "blacks only" word. But I just wanted to say that there are many black folks who refuse to use the word because it is offensive, period. So many people think that because the word is used in rap songs that it is somehow an acceptable word for all African Americans. Well, that simply is not true.

It's not good to believe everything that we see in the media. For instance, we all know that there are many responsible young people out there, and not every young person is spoiled or living an idle lifestyle. But if MTV was an accurate depiction of how all young people lived, then God help us all.

Hopefully people will use more than just music or the media to try and get to know what is important to other ethnic groups, age groups, religions, etc. I think that we would all like to be known on an individual basis instead of being characterized by a media-driven image of our ethnic group or age group.

I'm a white 30 year old male, and I voted for Barack Obama. But you know what? I fully admit that one of the reasons I admire him is that he is everything good about blackness and nothing bad. He's more Marvin Gaye than 50 Cent, more WEB Dubois than Malcolm X, more Tim Duncan than Allen Iverson, more Oprah Winfrey than Ice Cube.

And in this respect, contrary to the point expressed by Mr. Coates, Barack Obama is the exception in that he seems not to be obsessed about race. And that's why white people like me like him. I think he will be a fantastic role model for millions of black children, the ones I encounter everyday in my job as an inner city school teacher, and the single best thing about him for is that he will make being black less black, if you get my drift. Being black would get closer to being mainstream white.

Yeah, I know that sounds bad. I can get away with saying that because I'm not racist, and I get up every morning and do my best to help black children make it in America. If I say something here that sounds abrasive, well, I'm just being honest with how I see it.

The whole idea of embracing elements of whiteness is critical to stemming the crisis in urban black America, where in my (white, middle-class) opinion, there is still far too much obsession with preserving a sense of authentic blackness that prevents blacks from adopting values and behaviors that will better integrate them into society. The problem isn't that black communities are hotbeds of leftist separatism, it's that they are completely cut off from a positive relationship with mainstream white America. I don't care if blacks don't want to listen to John Mayer or watch Seinfeld, but they should take things from mainstream white America like being embarrassed if a teacher calls them at home to take about a disciplinary problem.

Mr. Coates is in this sense correct: too much of black America (not all by any means) is not concerned with what white America thinks. That's why they let their kids behave the way they do at school, it's why they don't clean up their neighborhoods, it's why they let their sons impregnate women and bail of child support. They don't care. The same could said about Appalachian America- they don't care what the rest of mainstream white America thinks about them either, and are worse off for it. (Which is why Jim Webb makes the connection between blacks and Appalachian whites.)

I'm reducing blacks crudely here, and reducing whites crudely here. But you get my gist. Let me put it this way: lower income blacks could benefit a lot from adopting certain values and attitudes that are associated with mainstream white America, and Barack Obama can be that bridge.


On a frivolous tangent here: Checked the link to Kenya Moore's site because I had never heard of her. Noted that despite the enormous breasts and make-up her face is very angular and masculine. Transexual?? Not sure I understand the reference to her, above.

"...black people aren't nearly as obsessed with white people, as media would have you think..."

Actually, I would suggest that White people probably tend to be obsessed with Black people rather than the reverse. Most White people don't KNOW anything about Black people or Black people's lives. And most White people don't care what HAPPENS to Black people or their children. But do not be confused, most White people MUST be obsessed with Black people because they refer to Black people often, they tell jokes about Black people, they complain about Black people, and they worry about what Black people might do to them or get that "belongs to" them. That's why White people are so quick to "explain" Black culture and the behavior of a given African-American individual or group. White people THINK they know Black people because Black people are all up in those White folks' minds.

Nate,
What's wrong with Allen Iverson?! (hehe)

Sorry, big time Nuggets fan here, and out here in Denver, Allen Iverson is a saint. You can chalk that up to short memories of his Philly days...or the fact that he's often seen side by side with perennial screw-up Carmelo Anthony.

So, you're saying that -- in the hierarchy of awareness of Self and Other -- essential humanity comes first, then race? Wow, what a concept! Then gender, then religion, then nationality, then sexual orientation, and so on, I guess, only not in such a neat, orderly row. I enjoy your blog; it's become daily reading. I agree that folks of all stripes need to just relax and learn. Open up the Soul gates. Listening to some Isaac Hayes would help, definitely. Maybe listen to some Curtis Mayfield, too. And some Donovan and Van Morrison for balance. And some Trane, absolutely some Trane.

If the cost of being post racial is to swallow my opinion on injustice (disparity in black arrests and convictions, police brutality, demonizing black culture), I think I'll pass.

"red black and green/ is just so much more than red black and green."

We need a Flavor of Love type show with Brother J. With the whole house eating wholistic foods and the whole crib smelling like cocoa butter and daily lessons on Egyptian culture. I'd watch. lol.

Nate,

Maybe you wouldn't come off as so racist if you weren't trying to make judgement calls about what constitues "good black" and "bad black." Hint: vilifying Malcolm X won't make you any friends.

I dunno, but claiming that you work with black kids every day, apparently trying to turn them into little white kids, doesn't really validate the "I'm not racist" claim you're making here.

You say "there is still far too much obsession with preserving a sense of authentic blackness that prevents blacks from adopting values and behaviors that will better integrate them into society." I wonder: how do you define "authentic blackness" here? Gangsta rap and killing someone for their shoes? Black criminals that are reported on in the nightly news? I would venture that a lot of people would probably have a different definition of what constitutes "authentic blackness," and I would argue that preserving cultural and ethnical differences is a good thing - I'd like to see more diversity, not less, thank you.

The funny thing is, in the end, it seems like what you're really trying to say is poor people need to be more like middle class people. Now some might claim that you're classist, but at least you might come across as less racist.

Sorry, but I wouldn't entirely dismiss the role of grievance in black identity—BLACK POLITICAL IDENTITY— as a "joke". I don't know how old you are, but I was "there" when the erstwhile Stokely Carmichael christened the modern embrace of the very term "black" for us ex-enslaved Africans in that moment between the end of the Civil Rights movement and the beginning of identity politics.
It was, in fact, primarily about the grievance. Afrocentricity and other cultural nationalisms, including Hip Hop, would come years later.

You may have an issue with the one-dimensionality of this characterization of black identity. But I think Obama's departure from this founding pillar is going to be a much bigger deal for black America than it also happens to comfort whites. It will be THE challenge. Once again, it's not fair that we should have to bear so much of the burden of this challenge, but that's the nature of still being defined--to ourselves as well as by whites--as a minority group.

Nate,

I don't think that you are a racist, but I disagree a bit with your analysis. I don't know if you noticed or not, but in your post you equated "white behavior" with success and "black behavior" with failure. Are there no successful black doctors or lawyers? Are there no whites who struggle? Is success not universally understood to be doing the best you possibly can? And can you only describe "mainstream white behavior" as being good or successful? Are there no examples in the mainstream you described that could be considered immoral or wrong? And are there not some people in the mainstream who didn't "make it"? There are successful people of all colors and there are people who struggle of all colors. Success is not "white" and failure "black." That is a pretty bold thing for you to imply. Honestly, I do not think that you are a racist. Perhaps misguided but not racist.

This has happened before. One group says that another is bad while saying their group is considered good. I would like to bring the Native Americans to our remembrance. People told them that they had to behave like a white person to be considered "good people," thus implying that being Native American means that you are a bad person by default. Are we going to do this again? How can we keep on doing this? It is wrong, I tell you. Wrong. It is insulting to anyone to have someone say that their ethnic group is not only considered bad, but is considered the very definition of "bad." What on earth can make people understand that this is an arrogant way of thinking and is lacking in morality? What does it take for people to learn that what is considered wrong behavior is just wrong behavior, not entire ethnic groups?

Okay, this was a bit of a rant. I am sorry but this bothers me. I have never really experienced racism so I am not coming from a place of pain or even suffering. People think that I am Filipino, but in fact I am Cherokee Indian, French, and African American. I don't care what color people are, they should not go around saying that a person's skin determines whether they are a good or bad person. It is wrong. Please, please, please don't tell people (kids especially) that they are bad because of the ethnic group they were born to. Please just don't do it. There are bad behaviors everywhere and it is puzzling to hear that bad behaviors are considered "black" and good behaviors are considered "white". We've been through this before, although the older generations moreso than mine. We can't go on like this; we are hurting each other.

Please, just target bad behavior and don't reference a color when describing good or bad behaviors. I am convinved that you are doing good work for the kids you teach. Carry on, and remember that this is a delicate subject for African Americans, Native Americans, and others because people (even well-meaning people) have told them that they are bad.

Colby and Alexis: I hear you. But let me offer the following points:

a) I'm offering up a reductive picture, but it's more accurate as a reflection of everyday life than stepping back and seeing white people and black for the complex racial constructs that they are. That only works for thesis papers, not daily interactions.

b) Mr. Coates recently wrote an article about Bill Cosby, and all I'm doing is echoing Cosby. Cosby talks about how blacks ought to forget the grievance path and just get down to business. That's what Obama has done. White people like these kind of black people, and as icky as that sounds, it matters, because the more mainstream white society accepts you, the more options you have.

c) I LOVE Black English. My goal is not to take that away from my black kids. I couldn't even if I wanted to, so it's a non-issue. But I do want them to be able to speak in a manner that will help them in a job interview with some non-hip white person- I basically want them to act white so they can get more opportunities. And sorry if this sentiment burns, but even my black kids know that showing up on time to class, doing homework, not talking back to teachers...it's acting white, even if some white kids do this too.

d) I think it's good to talk about this stuff, even if we use terms that might offend. I welcome people of other races to talk about their ideas of good white people and bad white people, even as we all acknowledge the world is more complex than this binary. Clearly for most black people Bill Clinton was a good white person, at least until recently. I'd be interested in knowing more about white people that black people like, and what appeals to them about these people.

Cuz let's face it, we don't sit together the cafeteria for a reason, and for every person who mixes easily with other races there are five who don't. (I'd put myself in the middle, in that I try to mix, but I don't as much as I'd like to)


Found my way to here from comments in Alas A Blog.

And thus far what I can come up with at the immediate moment is "WOW nate, just... wow. There's really no way I can honestly not call it racist. Seriously 'Mr. Good White Person' you need help." Makes it sadder that I have had clueless teachers like you in my life and what harm they caused me.

-Former Yes suh, boss/Uncle Ruckus poster

Nate,
Lot to critique here; too much for the time I have.

I appreciate that you are struggling with these issues, but you have made some dangerously faulty assumptions and you are skating blindly ahead on the basis of those. Not the least of which is your blanket statement that doing homework, showing up on time, etc etc are "acting white" actions. The fact that some black children (not all, by any means, or even most:check out the work of Ronald Ferguson of Harvard) associate these behaviors with whiteness does not make it so, and the fact that you, in your liberal, do-gooder whiteness, clearly perpetuate the idea among those students does far more harm than good.

But I get the feeling you will dismiss any critique of your positions as us being "too sensitive" or unwilling to face hard facts about the state of black America.

So you get to be not only deeply wrong (notice I am avoiding the R word here, because really it has become a meaningless distraction from the issues at hand) but smug and self-righteous about it.

Nice work.

Juan-

Can you elaborate on your accusation? Seriously, I'd be interested in hearing it. If I am racist, I'd like to change.

Kim,

Acting white is probably not the best term for what I'm describing. There aren't even any white kids at my school, mainly Asians, Latinos, and blacks, so acting Asian would be a better term at my school. Call it acting bourgeois. Call it acting square. (And I'll try and overlook the fact that the black kids, as well as much black popular culture, associate being bourgeois and square with being middle class white)

As for me perpetuating my belief that acting white is good for blacks onto my kids, well, don't worry. Nothing I say here ever makes it into the classroom. I believe in being positive and supportive, and I'm not going to make abstract intellectual arguments with the kids. All I say is "Do your homework!" I would never dream of saying "Do your homework and enjoy the fruits of acting white!"

And on a last note, I think you'd be a little less dismissive if you had to see on a regular basis these wonderfully enthusiastic, academically-oriented black girls come in as freshman and then watch them slowly stop coming to class on time, stop doing homework, start talking back, hanging around with the other black kids who are about to drop out. At the end of freshman year I should be recommending these kids to move up into the Honors level, and I end up deciding whether or not they should get a C, D, or F. I wish someone was taking more of an interest in what is going on with these girls, because I don't get that sense from black intellegensia outside of the reformers like Cosby, etc.


Nate,

I see where you're coming from here - but I think it becomes problematic when we start defining all of these "positive" things as white, and the "negative" ones as black. I agree that, like it or not, if people want to succeed they have to be able to operate within the existing hegemony (i.e. learn to talk like the mainstream talks, write like the mainstream writes, have appropriate responses to particular situations, be able to do well on a standardized test, etc.). But again, why not call it "mainstream" or "status quo" instead of white?

Some may argue that this is patronizing, overly pc, or pithy semantics, but I don't think so: after all, you yourself point out that a lot of white kids struggle due their own inability to act, as you say, "white." It seems like we're not really talking about skin color here, and trying to convince people that it's the skin color that's the "problem," or saying race when we mean something else, only leads to more problems and misunderstanding.

Nate,

I'm just back from spending an hour at a writing workshop with a bunch of black and Latino kids in a Boston Public School. I spent another two hours last week and more than that the week before, etc. etc.

Please don't think you and you alone are out there working to save black children. How deeply insulting.

Also, I'm glad you don't subject your students to your belief system. But to quote the writer Richard Price: kids can smell you.

Pretty much what people are already pointing out to you. How you associate anything positive and success with whiteness for one. How we have to be those standards you associate with whiteness--you don't paint them as good habits but habits that can only be whiteness for another. And your separating bad and good based on what is acceptable, appealing and appeasing to whites.

Very screwed up thing to deprogram when it's been shoved into your head as a kid. Anything divergent from whiteness, which is treated as the normative and default and needs to be considered and looked at as such, is to be at least avoided and at its worse needs to be tagged in one's mind as wrongbadfailurenegativesegregationistracist. And even when you don't make such teachings come across consciously the kids still pick it up based on perception, picking up cues and behaviors then elaborating upon them and their meaning.

Colby,

The whole problem is that if we use words like "mainstream" and "status quo", everyone knows those are words that are synonymous with mainstream white culture.

We had a black education professor come give our faculty a workshop on how to be more sensitive to black students' unique cultural backgrounds. He was a very smart man, and had a lot of insightful things to say. One thing he said was that blacks tend to be a much more spontaneous and interactive culture, and therefore we teachers should experiment with creating classrooms that don't involve hand-raising and students waiting to be called on before speaking.

I think this idea, and the whole premise of the workshop, is off the mark. Instead of teaching teachers how to be more accomodating to black culture, we should be teaching black parents and students how to be more accomodating to "mainstream" school culture. This involves learning how to be patient and wait until the teacher calls on you.

I don't say this out of the superiority of hand-raising vs. non-hand-raising. (Though I do the think the former trumps the latter). I say it out of what is going to get the best results. I feel like I have a fairly good handle on what mainstream culture is like, and it's pretty rigidly hegemonic. Teaching the system to be more flexible and accomodating isn't going to work, even if people like Juan could snap their fingers and magically make teachers like me disappear. It's so much bigger than me.

Which, getting back to the original post on the blog, is hopefully where Barack Obama can be a source of inspiration. The guy is mainstream in his values and attitudes, and works with the system to get where he wants to go. That's what we need our young students to embrace; we need them to want to be a part of the larger maistream culture. And we can go back and forth on this, but it just seems to me that at some point we might want to acknowledge that this means that many blacks may lose certain parts of their culture that they fiercely identify with if they are to succeed in moving up the social and economic ladder.

Nate,

I think what was shocking to people about your comments was that you seemed to be subscribing to the idea that doing well equals whiteness. Even if some of your minority students believe this, it was puzzling to see that you believe it as well. Like I said before, this truly harmful idea has been around for a long time and we would all do well to try and correct it.

First of all, one should question the legitimacy of the argument. Is it true? If a Native American person started their own business and spoke good English, does that mean that they are no longer Native American? And if a black person becomes a doctor, does that mean that they are no longer black? Can you really say that if these people do well, then they are no longer acting like Native Americans or African Americans? Is it too outlandish to say that minorities are acting like their own ethnic group when they succeed, or is it only acceptable to say that a minority is acting like their own ethnic group when they are doing poorly?

I still don't think that you are racist, but I do think that perhaps you have bought into the long-enduring belief that white can only be associated with success and good things and every other color can be associated with bad things at random. And like Kim said, to perpetuate this idea among students is harmful, even hurtful. They may have already bought into this way of thinking but that doesn’t mean that it is true.

My biggest problem with your statements was that they were all-encompassing: black equals bad, white equals good. You and I both know that there are good and bad people of every color under the sun. But it is disturbing when one person only sees good in their own group and bad in another's. How would you feel if someone used your ethnic group as a descriptive word for what is bad while using their own group as an example for all that is good? Just think about it for a second. If that really did happen to you, how would that make you feel and what would you want to say? (Rhetorical question, by the way. You don’t have to tell me, just think about it because that is basically what you said). When you can only see good in yourself and bad in others, I believe that is called arrogance, conceit, being deceived, what have you. It's unkind, whatever it is. It is most severely unkind and fallacious.

Nate, what I am trying to say is that you very bluntly painted a picture of what you consider black and white, and it wasn’t particularly an accurate depiction. My dad is black and Native American and he is a doctor (my mom’s white and Native American). Does that mean that my dad is acting white, black, or what? According to your logic, he would have to be acting like a white person even though he isn’t white. Do you see the degradation of entire peoples in your argument (and the glorification of another)? You have implied that when minorities do well in life they are somehow divorced of their ethnic heritage, freaks of nature, and white (even if they’re not). And when one does poorly then they are simply from a minority group again. If you can say that when a black person acts badly then they are acting like a black person, can you not say that when a black person does well they are also acting like a black person?

I’m not mad at you and I don’t think you are racist. Please just think about what you said.

Check out comment #7 by Leon Wynter on the other thread on this topic. It says some things that pertain to our discussion.

http://www.ta-nehisi.com/2008/06/more-on-black-political-identity-as-black-grievance.html#comment-118474260

Alexix, I think you misunderstand me. Because I agree with most of what you are saying. In my earlier comments, I admitted that sometimes we crudely reduce people to good and bad. The same goes for white people. Pat Buchanon, George W. Bush, Ann Coulter, these people are bad white people, demonstrating the worst qualities of whiteness- entitlement, vindictiveness, an astonishing lack of empathy. It's probably why most black people don't like these people much.

I don't subscribe at all to the idea that doing well equals whiteness. I do subscribe to to the idea that doing well IN SCHOOL means adopting certain behaviors, and many if not most of these behaviors are associated with whiteness. This color thing keeps getting in the way of our discussion though, so let's stop using it. Squareness, let's call it. Doing well in school means embracing at some level being square, and if you're cultural identity is based on a rejection of squareness, that's a problem. And it seems to me we should be focusing on how to get these rebellious kids of all colors, but particularly black kids because they are disproportionately falling behind, into a frame of mind that helps them see it's hip to be square.

I don't think we can leave the racial element out of this discussion. I can only speak from what I know, but when dirt-poor Asians kids who live in tiny, overcrowded apartments are working jobs after school and still pulling 4.0's, I think culture has something to do with it. It's not black intelligence, it's urban black culture, and I don't mean to blame the victim. White people of yore caused this situation, but now it's time to bury the hatchet, since that's the only way forward.

*FACEPALM*

"Pat Buchanon, George W. Bush, Ann Coulter, these people are bad white people, demonstrating the worst qualities of whiteness- entitlement, vindictiveness, an astonishing lack of empathy."

I have seen a lot of people who possess these qualities, and they weren't white. I would just call these qualities personal failings. All people have a propensity to behave in the ways you described, not just white people. I would not say that these people represent the worst qualities of whiteness, but they do have personal failings. Yes, I am reluctant and even unwilling to use the word white to describe their behavior. It does not make sense to me because the qualities you described are unappealing human behaviors which can be found everywhere.

"I don't subscribe at all to the idea that doing well equals whiteness. I do subscribe to the idea that doing well IN SCHOOL means adopting certain behaviors, and many if not most of these behaviors are associated with whiteness."

I was looking for an article that I thought I had saved about Native Americans but I wasn't able to find it. What it basically said was that not too many years ago, NA children were forced to leave their parents and were sent to schools where they were forced to assimilate. They were beaten if they spoke their language and they were discouraged from having contact with their parents. This created a void in the children's lives (and their parents') and to this day many Native Americans are trying to hold on to their language and the sense of community they once had. In order to bury the hatchet, one needs to acknowledge that there were many, many good things that were taken away from these and other minorities (and you did do that in your previous post). Let's take language, for instance. Native Americans had their own languages and alphabet. They knew how to write in their own language. So the concept of having school or a place of learning was already in place. Secondly, families were broken up and little children saw their parents humiliated for simply wearing different kinds of clothes. As recently as 1970, Native American kids were still being taken away from their parents.

The question that I have been asking since I was about 15 is what happens to people when they are forced to give up the things that held them and their families together? I have found that the answer is very complicated and there is no one-size-fits-all explanation. Some people grit their teeth and simply try to survive in their new environment. Others, sadly, sink into depression, alcoholism, and other things. But these are all human behaviors and humans are very complex creatures, no?

I am not going to touch the Asian reference for a couple of reasons. First, I don't want to because some Asians don't like being called the "model minority" because it seems like just another convenient way to lump them all together. Some don't mind the label, but others do. Also, while Asian Americans have had troubles in this country, they have had a very unique immigration experience. And Asian does not just mean Chinese. Asians are Vietnamese, Cambodian, Laotian, etc.

Back to burying the hatchet. I don't think that saying bad behaviors are a part of a culture or ethnic group is very helpful, especially if you are dealing with groups of people who have had good things already taken away from them or their ancestors. Just like if you or a family member were in a very traumatic situation and you don't want to be reminded of it or relive it, the same is true here. The absolute best thing that you and I can do is steer clear of bringing race into a matter when we are talking about human behavior.

Last thought. I am white but I am also mixed with two minorities. So I know first-hand what it is like to discover at a rather young age that there are set ideas in people's minds about me and my ethnic group(s). I want to encourage people to think about their fellow man or woman in more than just white or black terms. We are all so much more complicated than that.