White Supremacy is White America’s Legacy and Our Responsibility to Defeat
Jack Daly
2.3K139

electing a man president who loudly espoused patently racist rhetoric and brought to the White House men who openly embrace white nationalism

During the election I was not a Trump supporter but nor was I a Clinton supporter. During the rhetoric that led up to the election countless Medium contributors declared, like you, that Trump was “racist,” “misogynist.” “xenophobic.” And more times that I can count I asked (with genuine interest) for anyone to point me to an actual quote that could reasonably have ascribed to it the derisive label. No one did with any reference that could be verified or which did not itself simply reflect a declared supposition (although they did, as I expect will occur here, apply those same labels to me for just asking the question). Frankly, it didn’t appear that most of them knew the definition of the words they were using, or, more to the point, didn’t care. They believed, as I think you do, that simply applying a derisive label to someone with whom you disagree somehow gives you the moral high-ground. In a way it does; but only among those who also don’t care what the words mean or whether they really apply.

a white “Ally” is by his own provenance a member of the oppressor caste

It’s apparent you don’t see how defining and lumping people into “caste[s]” is a step toward racist behavior. Here’s how its been done: Take a group of people identifiable by some racial characteristic. Never mind that as a group they are as diverse any any other. Then let’s identify a problem (that may or may not exist in reality) and squarely lay the blame on that group, whether or not they have directly participated in any activity that remotely could be said to have caused the manifestation of this so-called problem. Then hold the entire group responsible for those problems and if they don’t fix it (as a group) according to some undefinable standard of your own making, take action against individual members of that group whenever the opportunity presents itself. Today, your target is white males (because you would lose your SJW/Liberal/Progressive standing if you included females). Yesterday it was Jews. The paradigm isn’t changed just because you believe your cause is just; everyone that uses racial “caste[ing]” thinks their cause is just.

there is genuine inequality in our society in which certain people, by provenance of their birth, are bound to endure.

A conclusion belied by the success of diverse ethnic groups, even to the point of being elected to the highest office in government. There are far too many successful Blacks and Hispanics to make this claim. So if Blacks and Hispanics are by empirical fact not “bound to endure genuine equality” then the answer to any individual failure must lie elsewhere. Everyone is born with some measure of inherent baggage and no matter who you are, someone had it better and someone had it worse that you did. And the fact some who had it worse nevertheless achieved more success despite the weight of any baggage at birth conclusively demonstrates that success and failure are localized and maybe even individualized, and not the result of some systemic oppression.

White supremacy is nothing new, it defines our national history.

I’m not sure what you mean by this; I don’t think you are either.

Resisting white supremacy is also about preserving our democracy and freedoms….. Crushing its extremist manifestations and stamping out its lingering, latent undercurrents is a moral, humanistic imperative but it is also a matter of existential importance for progress and liberty.

Powerful words, but what do they really mean? Define, if you will, “extremist manifestations” and explain how you achieve “liberty” by “crushing” or “stamping” them out. I’m willing to bet that “extremist manifestations” are in the eye of the beholder and the idea of “crushing” or “stamping out” that with which we disagree seems almighty close to the antithesis of “liberty.” Remember, we don’t need “free speech” or a “free press” if we (or a majority) agree on whatever it is being said. We don’t need freedom of religion if we all belong to the same church. The concept of “liberty” is to think and say what you want, no matter how deplorable to the majority and to belong to whatever damnable church you want to. As with your conclusory use of derisive labels in place of factual, persuasive argument, I don’t think you know what the words you use mean; or you don’t care, since, for example, to truly champion the concept of “liberty” you could not advocate “crushing” and “stamping out” those thoughts or ideas with which you disagree.

bigotry and racism has and continues to affect the bodies and minds of our minority communities

I actually agree with this statement, but not in the way you intended. If the writing on Medium is any measure, I have witnessed countless expressions of racism and bigotry and even calls for violence by members of “our minority communities.” I don’t expect, though, that you regard these expressions as anathema to “democracy” or “liberty.” Indeed, I think to the extent someone entreated to “crush” or “stamp out” such bigoted and racist thoughts and ideas you would be among the first to denounce the suggestion as contrary to the very principles that make America a great nation. Too bad you use race or color as your litmus test for determining whether to honor those principles.

Consigning it to the dustbin of history can only be achieved through exorcising White America’s acceptability towards prejudice and denial of our role in the injustice of others.

And exactly how is what you characterize as “White America’s acceptability towards prejudice” manifest and precisely what “role” does a person with a white complexion who has never acted based upon racial characteristics in conducting their affairs have in “the injustice of others.” What, exactly, are you saying that “role” is (real world example please)? Is it that they are not “crushing” or “stamping out”? And when you use those words, what actions do you think are needed to fulfill that objective? Are you advocating violence, like the violence that was exchanged by counter-protesters in Charlottesville? From the clips I saw, there appeared to be a lot of crushing and stamping going on and look how that turned out. So be clear so that I, a “White American,” can know precisely what it is you are advocating that I do, not in the grandiose conclusory terms you use in this piece, but real world examples of how you want “White America” to go about “crushing” and “stamping out” ideas with which we disagree. Frankly, I won’t hold my breath, because your whole piece suggests you really don’t know what you’re talking about. You’re just looking for a few SJW points so that you can pretend to a moral superiority that you do not possess.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.