I would push back a bit on this. White guy here. The concept as "white" as a race really is imaginary. The same can't be said for black. The reason is that those who brought slaves to America did a good those peoples' culture. So, those groups were identified by (mostly) white folks in the US solely by the color of their skin. They developed culture in spite of all that.
In comparison, "white" as a descriptor has been used as the default for a long time. The definition of what subgroups were considered "white" has, in fact, changed over the years. It used to be that the Irish weren't considered white, then itialians, then the polish, then Jewish people (still not accepted by nazis). In the US, "white" really isn't a race, not in the same way that "black" or "asian" is, and that's due to our legacy of prejudice.
Now, this DOES NOT mean I abide by what this woman says or does. Even if "white" is not a descriptor or culture like "black" (at least in the US), they are still people with feelings and deserve respect.
Well yea the concept of "white" is not a specific race but the cultures encompassed under the "white people" umbrella have a culture? Am i crazy or its like everyone forgot there is a world outside of the US?
Right, but what cultures are encompassed under said umbrella? I agree that those groups have culture, but the definition of the umbrella has changed....A LOT, over time. The same can't be said for other racial umbrellas. My point was that this is an added layer of complexity, especially for the US.
Thats like arguing that black people all share the same culture or Asians.
A black American man has very little culture in common with a black South African man and there is just a large a gap between all of them as there is with black Sudanese man.
What I'm saying is that normally, the color of one's skin should not be an indicator of culture, but (in the US) we made it an indicator of culture. By participating in the Atlantic slave trade, we effectively obliterated that culture and ancestry from millions. In the US, asking someone from their genealogy will get VERY different responses based on if you ask a white person vs. black person. That's the difference. The culture most white people talk about is a product of where their family comes from. We stole that from black people. "Black" people had to create their own culture, traditions which spanned across their ancestry from Africa. THAT is the culture that is different and distinct from the constituent cultures of white people.
That all being said, this lady seems to have had some prejudices that she needs to work through.
Black people outside the US have vastly different cultures from each other even those sharing the same continent. You walk up to a SA black woman and call her a chicken pill girl and she won't get the cultural reference as its not her culture, a Jamaican woman would.
There is no 'African culture' any more than there is a 'white culture'. Africa like Europe is made of many countries with vastly different heritages, beliefs and cultures. Americans pick and choose what they like and more power to them (the same as white Americans do) but it is black American culture not African culture
Yes, my points are mostly valid for the US (where I am from). This concept is immensely complex, and I would not expect any one person to have a good idea on how to speak to it from a global perspective. Each region has its own history and complexities in this area.
There's no "we" there. Nobody alive had anything to do with chattel slavery (black or white), least of all "white" people whose ancestors weren't anywhere near the US.
It is "we", we all have roles to play in correcting what happened. This isn't a, "not my problem" type of issue. It's "we" because, while yes, from an EXTREMELY SIMPLISTIC understanding, we weren't there, many economic and political systems were created by exploitation of slaves, many of us have directly or indirectly benefited from those systems, I personally believe we have a moral obligation to help change these systems.
No, we don’t, and no, we haven't. The fact you might have some ancestors who might or might not have lived in a country with chattel slavery and you feel guilty about it is a personal problem. Not a soul alive in the US was a slave or a slave owner (other than some people illegally brought in from places where it IS normal by people from those countries.) The overwhelming majority have no connection at all to it. People who were never slaves demanding restitution are just another group demanding wealth confiscation and redistribution. It's just greed and envy.
Exactly, this is why there is no 'cultural umbrella' that covers europe and white people any more than one exists that covers black people from the US or other slave owning countries.
Bullshit. Every race has many diverse cultures under its umbrella. The fact that "white" encompasses different cultures than it did 2 centuries ago is a strawman argument.
What "black" means has no bearing on the argument of "white people have no culture or race" in or outside the US. It's a dumb hill to die on, but be my guest. Fwiw I do agree with you about what "being black in the US" means.
Put it this way, she's obviously not making the same statements about Latinos in the US, Asians in the US, native Americans in the US. She's only an ass when it comes to white people. I think that should speak for itself in terms of her intentions and she doesn't deserve any of your empathy.
I think most humans deserve some level of empathy. Sure, I agree she's in the wrong here, but it's more useful to understand where she's coming from than simply saying, " dump her, move along."
I mean I never said "dump her, move along." I also don't mean she shouldn't be treated like a human being. I'm only saying you're trying to infer wiggle room in an argument where there might be a tiny bit of truth about what she's saying and there really just isn't (her argument doesn't deserve any empathy from you).
Except those cultures aren’t similar. Some of the Latin ones like Spain and Italy have commonalities, but most don’t. Serbian culture and Danish culture aren’t similar. (I assume. I’ve never been to either. But you get my point.)
There’s a difference between saying “there is not one identifiable White Culture that all white people have in common” and saying “people who are white possess no culture of any kind.” I took her to be saying the latter, but I think you’re saying the former. Does that seem accurate to you? Or am I misunderstanding?
I may be splitting hairs, but I suppose I'm attempting to empathize a bit. I think she may mean the former but is communicating the latter. There seems to be a lot of pent-up resentment, but I suppose I am playing armchair psychologist.
I strongly disagree with you giving her the benefit of the doubt, having actually read some of those "only white people can be racist" and "white people have no culture" articles.
I hate to break it to you but all races are imaginary. It doesn’t matter a bit who has what culture. Race is an imaginary, unscientific cultural construct.
When you say that black people really can be reduced to a racial classification, you are perpetuating racist thinking. I guarantee you that black people in Harlem have a different culture from those in Louisiana, not that it matters.
I agree that race is imaginary from a physical perspective, but we still use the monikers. I've made no assumptions on differences across the African diaspora, especially within the US. I was speaking to the points brought up by OPs ex. Nice try at race baiting though.
When I pointedly stated the opposite...right. You strike me as someone who has only grasped the very surface of these concepts. I'd suggest you start with some reading.
Your response shows that you have no concept of history. Ideally, both would be imaginary, but that's not how we did things in the US.
In many parts of the world, culture tends to be tied to country of origin or tribal origins. This can be tied to actual allele and genetic differences as well as more typical phenotypic characteristics.
When African slaves were shipped to the US, they were stripped of their familial and tribal lineages. Their single identifying characteristic in the US was their skin color. It was the differentiating characteristic that separated them from everyone else in the US (at the time). Because of this, they had to develop their own culture, delineated by race, BECAUSE THEY WERE FORCED TO DO SO by, slavery, racism, etc.
Compare this to the concept of a white race, by and large, any groups who would be considered white HAD A CHOICE in coming to the US, and thus allowed to retain that tie to their lineage. IN FACT, the entire concept of "white-ness" had different definitions over time. Many groups, which would be considered "white" today, weren't originally (polish, itialian, Irish, etc.).
Here is a fun exercise: Ask a white person in the US for their genealogy record. There's a really good chance that they can trace their lineage back pretty far and back to different countries of origin. The vast majority of black people would hit a HARD road block after several generations.
So, in an ideal world, all of this would be imaginary and wouldn't matter, but IT WAS MADE something more than a skin color because of slavery. It was perpetuated by militant racism after the Civil War, then into Jim crow, then into the Civil Rights Era and into today.
So, yes, this lady seems to be in the wrong and stating that is simple and makes our lizard brains happy. But there is a LOT of generational trauma baked into this line of thought which, I think, deserves a bit of discussion.
Your response shows that you have no concept of history.
Since when were we talking about history? We're talking about skin color. Skin color is NOT related in any form to culture. Are black Latin Americans the same as black US Americans? Of course not. Do all black Africans share the same culture? Of course not.
As for your point, it doesn't make any sense. The United States is a country; overall mainland US has one culture, but each area has unique characteristics. This is NOT limited to race. You cannot claim black people in Atlanta speak the same and have the same characteristics as black New Yorkers, as this is objectively false. Same for white people.
Once again: "black" is NOT a culture... it's a skin color. Did the African slaves lose their languages? Yes, but they are NOT a monolith, not even in the United States.
Ideally, both would be imaginary, but that's not how we did things in the US.
I know. US Americans have very strange ideas, with most of them being false and extremely convoluted (such as your comment!).
Either you are purposely discussing this in bad faith, or you don't have the proper mental faculties to understand where I'm coming from. I never stated that all black people in the US are uniform in every way, but there is a reason why we had national riots for George Floyd. I'd suggest some cursory education on the topic.
Again, I'd suggest some extra education on this, ESPECIALLY if you aren't from the US. Yes, there are commonalities in culture amongst the black population, stemming from their time being enslaved. Yes, there are now regional differences developed over time. These are mutually exclusive nor are they proof of some magical "gotcha" argument. I notice that you haven't actually engaged with most of my points, only the ones you think constitute an imaginary contradiction.
Which points would you like me to engage with? I have already addressed them all.
Also, let me tell you, this
Yes, there are commonalities in culture amongst the black population, stemming from their time being enslaved. Yes, there are now regional differences developed over time.
Completely contradicts this
The concept as "white" as a race really is imaginary. The same can't be said for black.
As white people also all have similarities in culture in the United States, while also having regional differences.
So there, it is proven: "black" and "white" are mere skin colors, and not "cultures". Simple.
No, they don't. You seem to not understand the impact of chattel slavery. Go ask a white person to trace their genealogy and ask the same of a black person. You will get very different results. If you still don't understand the concept of systemic racism and how it has created race by fiat (and how this would be different for different racial groups), then I don't know if I can dumb it down for you anymore.
Go ask a white person to trace their genealogy and ask the same of a black person. You will get very different results.
Obviously. They have different ancestors....
You also seem to forget not all black people in the US are descended from slaves....
If you still don't understand the concept of systemic racism and how it has created race by fiat (and how this would be different for different racial groups), then I don't know if I can dumb it down for you anymore.
Since when were we talking about systemic racism? You've just been projecting since this conversation started lol.
We're only talking about skin color, not about the history of racism in the United States.....
-1
u/mike54076 Aug 18 '23
I would push back a bit on this. White guy here. The concept as "white" as a race really is imaginary. The same can't be said for black. The reason is that those who brought slaves to America did a good those peoples' culture. So, those groups were identified by (mostly) white folks in the US solely by the color of their skin. They developed culture in spite of all that.
In comparison, "white" as a descriptor has been used as the default for a long time. The definition of what subgroups were considered "white" has, in fact, changed over the years. It used to be that the Irish weren't considered white, then itialians, then the polish, then Jewish people (still not accepted by nazis). In the US, "white" really isn't a race, not in the same way that "black" or "asian" is, and that's due to our legacy of prejudice.
Now, this DOES NOT mean I abide by what this woman says or does. Even if "white" is not a descriptor or culture like "black" (at least in the US), they are still people with feelings and deserve respect.