Stuff White People Say

September 20, 2008

“I get what you’re saying…”

Filed under: Stuff White People Do — nquest2xl @ 2:37 am

… WHEN THEY DON’T and know they’re not even going to try.

Actually, all kinds of people say things like that when they know they don’t mean it but it is particularly disturbing when this tactic, perhaps used as a way to be diplomatic, is employed in discussions about race/racism, often when trying to rationalize behavior/beliefs that are problematic.  As fate would have it, our friend and yours, Macon D, tried to employ that strategy, making that very statement, and simply failed.

Right now, our pal, is asking for some help, trying to find other things to talk about.  You got that right:  he wants other people to help him come up with Stuff White People Do…  While I especially like the classic example of stuff Whites do to try to assert dominance (in a conversation) while avoiding taking responsibility that Jodie brought up, I would be remiss if I did not highlight Macon’s own desperate attempt to avoid taking responsibility and his desire to dominate by non-approval.

Non-approval of my posts, that is.

Yes, our friend Macon in his own words wants to have, quite literally, “the last words” which lead me to mine here…  As far as the stuff White people do,  I’m trying to figure out why my comment(s) aren’t accepted while other people labeled “trolls”, “concern trolls” even, are.  Actually… I should say were, as well — i.e. Restructure had a post accepted after the so-called “last words” when mine wasn’t.

I believe there’s a term for that.  One that explains the difference.  So, allow me to say, e-publicly, “Macon, I get what you’re saying.”  And all I have to say to that is, borrowing heavily from Tim Wise

Your Whiteness Is Showing!!

(Here’s the post Macon didn’t want to post on his thread which just happened to be targeted at prejudices.  PREJUDICES!  I know, the irony is THICK, isn’t it?)

Whether you call it wild or not, it’s still an assumption you have no basis for. Because of your faulty assumption, your whole position here falls flat like a house of cards.

You absolutely do NOT know what being White entails for the people in the video. You have absolutely NO idea whether any single person in the video has any RELEVANT racial prejudice that they would have to overcome regarding a Black president Obama.

But feel free to speak at length about the racial prejudice you’ve had to overcome with respect to Obama and Black people in general. White Trash Academic et al can do it too since your underlying assumption which pervades so much if not all of your analysis is that ALL WHITE PEOPLE ARE RACIST and, in this case, that said racism is RELEVANT to the position they/ya’ll take regarding the prospects of a Black president Obama.

And, again, notice how Obama is singularly Black despite the argument you’ve made previously that his biracial background must not go unnoticed.

Beyond that, thanks for admitting that you’re making an ASSUMPTION with no actual evidence beside your generalized ASSUMPTION that ALL WHITES ARE RACIST and the idea is relevant in all/every case-consideration. Now, regarding your claim that you see “fear”… WHERE?? Where do you see it, Macon? Instead of identifying the statement Stephanie made that sounded like “fear”, all you did was make an assertion.

In the video she spoke rather dispassionately about taking care of [Iraqi] veterans. There was no “fear” in her voice, in her eyes or in anything she said. She voiced her concern for the forgotten wounded warriors which logically was a strike against McCain given his opposition to the new GI bill.

Stephanie went on to state how she agreed with Obama on a number of issues and NOT because she “feared” McCain. That was plain to see. The “fear” you claim is there was not. All we could see in the video you provided for us to reflect on was how Stephanie’s decision to vote FOR Obama (which is different than merely voting against McCain) was for very principled reasons.

But go ahead and say where you saw the fear at… that and the signs of racial prejudice. And if there were no signs in the video then why use it in the first place?

Obviously, you didn’t need the video to speak from your staple underlying assumption that ALL WHITES ARE RACIST.

Advertisements

77 Comments »

  1. You got that right: he wants other people to help him come up with Stuff White People Do…

    You write as if there’s something wrong with that. Personally, I like blogs where some of the content comes from readers. It’s a good way of taking advantage of an interactive medium.

    Comment by macon d — September 20, 2008 @ 5:07 am | Reply

  2. Macon D, is there a reason why you censored Nquest’s comment?

    Comment by Restructure! — September 20, 2008 @ 4:41 pm | Reply

  3. Restructure, Macon is looking for something… anything to change the subject. But since he wants to go there, I’ll oblige by noting how this thread allows him to “take advantage of an interactive medium” and gives him something to talk about — i.e. “Macon’s own desperate attempt to avoid taking responsibility and his desire to dominate by non-approval.”

    I mean, that’s STUFF WHITE PEOPLE DO:
    censor credible and apparently inconvenient critiques of non-whites and certain non-whites in particular.

    On the “you write as if there’s something wrong with that” score, I offer the full statement Macon made featuring the title (follow the links in the header-post for the full content of the post/thread):

    “Nquest, I get what you’re saying; here’s the last word on the points you’re raising again and again, unless White Trash Academic has more to add (I’m not trying to speak for her here).”

    The record is clear: before Macon flexed his Whiteness Nquest (tis, I) had only made 3 posts, 2 of them responding to the poster White Trash Academic who wrongfully accused me of something I did do — which was cause for me to explain the actual point I was making… ahem… again — and then did the Macon, pretending to “take” my point of clarification while still manufacturing ridiculous reasons (i.e. completely making up stuff that’s false on its face) to deny the correctness of the simple observations I made.

    White Trash Academic wild swinging (he’s no batter…) aside, NOTICE HOW MACON DOESN’T WANT TO TALK ABOUT HOW HIS WHITENESS IS SHOWING. Notice how my suggestion for a topic is ignored. I mean, it’s not like the theme is something strange or obscure, it’s a theme similar to the one Jodie mentioned.

    So I wonder if there will ever be a discussion on Macon’s blog exploring the CONTROL FREAK tendencies that exists in Stuff White People Do. I wonder if Macon is adept enough to be able to identify when Whites attempt to create or reserve a position of [White] Supremacy for themselves in interracial interactions. That’s what Jodie described when she noted how Whites essentially create a superior position for themselves by automatically questioning the validity of social critiques when they come from POC and then insisting on POC fixing a problem, “systemic oppression”, that is not of their creation.

    Comment by nquest2xl — September 20, 2008 @ 5:26 pm | Reply

  4. Because he’d had his say. I knew if I let him continue, he’d do what he often does–hijack another comment-thread, with repetitious, tedious screeds that presumptuously insist that I’m a “desperate,” “bullshit”-spewing “liar” when I merely disagree with him. I do get what he’s saying in this case–I just disagree. But NQ never takes “I disagree with you” for an answer. He’s welcome to comment on any of my posts, but not to hijack comment threads.

    Comment by macon d — September 20, 2008 @ 5:33 pm | Reply

  5. [Nq’s comment no. 3 appeared as I was typing no. 4–mine is addressed to Restructure’s no. 2]

    Comment by macon d — September 20, 2008 @ 5:36 pm | Reply

  6. Macon, I think that I ‘hijack’ some of your threads, why the double-standard? I was also called “troll” and it’s clear that also my presence on your board isn’t welcomed by many of your readers.

    Comment by jwbe — September 20, 2008 @ 5:49 pm | Reply

  7. Macon, you are wrong. I never take “I disagree with you” for an answer when the basis of your so-called disagreement has no basis. Get it right. And this notion that I “hi-jack” threads is laughable. It’s particularly laughable, ridiculous actually, given the context that ALL THREE OF US (me, Restructure and JW) were labeled “trolls.”

    And the fact that THE POST YOU DID NOT APPROVE contained no such language where I labeled you a “liar”, etc. shows that it’s about something else, Macon. You might as well be honest. YOUR WHITENESS IS SHOWING and your presumptuous “I knew if I let him continue” rhetoric flies in the face of the defense you always like to use on JW. Somehow, with all the Whiteness vested in you (I presume), only you have a license to read other people’s minds. You just “knew”… lol

    I “had” my say, huh… How mighty White of you. Our whole interaction shows how you are addicted to your presumed sense of White Supremacy and White Privilege. Notice this pure contradiction of yours:

    “I know what becoming white in America entails well enough to know that it’s not a “wild” assumption…”

    Again, by the Whiteness vested in you, you give yourself a special license that no one else has and, worst, when you can’t substantiate the ridiculous claims you make, you want to hide behind “we disagree agree.”

    Well, Macon, people who think/thought the earth was flat disagreed with people who knew better via facts/logic on their side. That’s why “I disagree with you” isn’t an acceptable answer. When you stick to logically indefensible reasons for your position, as you often do, there is no reason for anyone to accept the disagreement as a matter differing opinions. You’re entitled to your own opinion, for sure. But you are not entitled to your own facts or your own scenario where you are “right” or justified when you make unjustified ASSUMPTIONS for no justifiable reason.

    Your Flat Earth positions are never supposed to be acceptable. That’s why Restructure never accepts your lack of rigor… Imagine that. Restructure doesn’t takes “I disagree with you” for an answer either.

    Now what’s your excuse?

    Comment by nquest2xl — September 20, 2008 @ 6:11 pm | Reply

  8. Seriously, when I explain, at length, how Macon made unjustified assumptions about things Black people think… somehow what “I know” about Black people and being Black was unimportant to Macon. Somehow, Macon had a better idea of what MANY Blacks think/thought better than I do.

    Flash forward to Macon’s ridiculous mind-reading notion that the White Republicans in the pro-Obama video, a small self-selected group mind, just had to… just had to overcome racial prejudice because of some vague notion that ALL WHITES ARE RACIST. Now Macon didn’t have to know any of those people personally and Macon didn’t have to see/hear a single thing from any of the people in the video to just jump to mind-reading or automatically assigning them racial prejudice because hey, Macon is White and he’s knows ALL WHITES ARE RACIST.

    Then Macon’s logic is even more sloppy. He rambles off standard rhetoric about how racial prejudice is often unconscious but obviously didn’t think about that long enough to account for how those Whites could ever overcome their racial prejudice without being conscious of them.

    The point here, Macon, is that, per your pattern, your censorship is as logically indefensible as the ideas you come up with in your threads. There is no way you can “get” what I said and still maintain the logically indefensible position you started out with. PERIOD.

    If you honestly read what I said and “got” it then, whether you agreed with me or not, you still would not continue trying to act like your wild assumptions are justified on the basis that you “believe it’s safe to assume” something just because the people in the video are White. That’s all you were going on given what you said.

    So, using your logic, since you are White then you are racist and your racism shines through in every thread of yours. That’s something, employing your logic, I believe is something we can safely assume. That’s also the safe assumption I can make for the difference in censorship.

    Comment by nquest2xl — September 20, 2008 @ 6:31 pm | Reply

  9. yes, this difference in censorship I could already realize when posting with you on predominantly white message boards. This subtle and sometimes not so subtle racism towards you, because whites can’t endure Black people who “don’t know their place”, as it seems.
    Welcomed in their racist club are only Black people who agree with them, don’t critize and don’t question and challenge white power.
    With that I also understand how difficult or even impossible it is to uproot racism with something like dialogue, it is like a psychological disease people don’t want to face.
    There is no feeling of shame, no insight, no thinking about what you say, only these attempts to silence you so that they can feel superior. What a sick attitude, and most of all how sick is it to label this shit “anti-racism” to get the approval from other sick whites who don’t want to change anything, who don’t want to establish true equality.

    Comment by jwbe — September 20, 2008 @ 6:49 pm | Reply

  10. and what I really don’t understand is that people can read about racism, link to Tim Wise with the attempt to “educate” others without the ability to realize or admit the own mistakes. Doing exactly this what one is pointing out and criticizing in others. How does this work?

    Comment by jwbe — September 20, 2008 @ 7:20 pm | Reply

  11. OK, I’m going back through post and trying to peace together this whole Macon, you, Restructure!, and JW thing. From what I gather, you folks are saying that Macon D often assumes in his post that all white people are racist just to highlight his own “enlightenment”? And since that is the overriding goal of his post, he/she is sloppy in her/his attempt to understand racism. S/he then censors you folks when you start calling it out…particularly when it’s done by you, nquest??
    Is that what is going on?

    Comment by Pyro — September 20, 2008 @ 7:25 pm | Reply

  12. Pyro, this is an on-going critque about Macon’s sloppy, assumption filled logic. He has made untenable assumptions about what Black/non-white people think and, now, how ALL WHITES are racist and, therefore, any Whites who support Obama had to “overcome” their prejudices.

    I really don’t make any judgments as to the reason Macon does what he does. I’m not concerned with that. I just have a problem with anybody making the kind of wild assumptions Macon does. I, at least, like to be able to follow someone’s logic, whether they agree with me or not. I can’t do that when Macon doesn’t have a logical basis for the outrageous things he says, for whatever reason he says them.

    Here is Macon’s recent thread that served as the impetus for this one:
    http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/2008/09/allow-reality-to-overcome-their.html

    Here is an old thread where Macon made a ridiculous assumption about African-Americans, which I disputed on the basis of me being African-American and knowing better than that AND, primarily, on the basis that Macon’s own claims didn’t hold up.
    http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/2008/06/express-amazement-when-non-white-people.html?showComment=1214680020000#c5994114012905266873

    Elements of the old thread(s) were highlighted here before:
    https://stuffwhitepeoplesay.wordpress.com/2008/07/17/im-a-spokesperson-for-black-people/
    https://stuffwhitepeoplesay.wordpress.com/2008/07/17/then-how-am-i-supposed-to-generalize-the-racial-experiences-of-people-of-color/
    https://stuffwhitepeoplesay.wordpress.com/2008/08/02/hey-im-white-and-im-a-newbie/
    https://stuffwhitepeoplesay.wordpress.com/2008/07/21/believe-others-consider-them-trustworthy/
    https://stuffwhitepeoplesay.wordpress.com/2008/07/19/african-american-men-dont-shake-hands-like-that/

    His censorship was mentioned here:
    https://stuffwhitepeoplesay.wordpress.com/2008/07/20/im-rejecting-the-comment-you-submitted-for-publication-approval/

    It’s clear Macon reacts differently to me. On two occasions when Macon perceived that his intelligence was being questioned, the most violent explosion, emotionally speaking, happened when he responded to me.

    Comment by nquest2xl — September 20, 2008 @ 7:48 pm | Reply

  13. …I’m a “desperate,” “bullshit”-spewing “liar”

    Now, Macon… Let’s have you premise your responses to Restructure and JW based on the less than flattering things they have said when describing something you’ve done/said.

    I mean, you have to know how you retreat to this “Nquest = bad” rhetoric whenever you’re challenged to explain why you just can’t discuss/debate what I’m saying. You also have to know that you don’t pull up three of the most offensive (to you) statements either Restructure of JW have said to you as an excuse for your behavior towards them.

    YOUR WHITENESS IS SHOWING. So feel free to discuss what manner of racism or racial prejudice you have that’s impacting your apparent differential treatment of me, Restructure and JW.

    Comment by Nquest — September 20, 2008 @ 10:04 pm | Reply

  14. Pyro,

    I think the most messed up thing that Macon D said was that whites discuss calmly and rationally, white non-whites discuss in an emotionally-engaged way. That’s racist!

    Macon D felt that his job as a white antiracist ally is to be the spokesperson for black people (or the summarizer of black opinion); he believes he has the knowledge and authority to tell whites and non-whites about what non-whites are really thinking (such as with respect to handshaking preference); he thinks that being accountable of people of colour means asking people of colour to educate him; and when we told him not to generalize the racial experiences of people of colour, he decided he was going to do it anyway. When a non-white pointed out that what he said was stereotyping [non-white people], he said, “It may well be that you’ve stereotyped yourself, by reading something into the post that isn’t there.”

    Basically, Macon D feels that he has the authority to tell everyone else—both white and non-white—what is and isn’t racism. When Macon D is criticized for his racial analysis of a specific post, instead of dealing with the specific criticism, he engages in defensive behaviour and lists reasons why he isn’t racist and why he is a good antiracist.

    Comment by Restructure! — September 20, 2008 @ 10:20 pm | Reply

  15. Macon’s censorship is a good example how white privilege works. Because I am white I can post there, I was censored but no longer. I can call him quite a few names and can also insult some of his readers. And my race won’t work against me.
    But Nquest’s race works against him. Because he is Black, and Macon’s blog is not the only one were I have to witness this, he has to be more polite, his style is always blamed and he is expected to give his approval for even the most racist shit, just because somebody claims directly or indirectly that s/he is on his side.
    This is how white supremacy works. And I also know, that such whites try to pull me over to their side.
    Macon, you can try to make your blog a white-only area, at the end of the day it is you alone you have to endure with all your lies and racism you claim you want to get rid of.
    Your unmaking Macon isn’t an anti-racist blog, but in reality it is the journey of a troubled guy and I could feel sorry for you if I could expand my empathy towards people like you. But I can’t as long as your blog harms other people.

    Comment by jwbe — September 20, 2008 @ 11:08 pm | Reply

  16. In addition to Macon D’s double standards for whites and non-whites, he also has double standards for himself and others. He had censored my comments and Nquest’s comments which he perceived were personal attacks on him about “what kind of person he is”, but he seems to be okay with letting through personal attacks on other people that he doesn’t like.

    Recently, I posted a comment (which he let through) that said, “A lot of what you have written that has offended me (or rather, made me think that you are an idiot) were errors of gathering data that led to a racist result.” This was within and within the context of a long comment that I wrote.

    Macon D admonished me: “And finally Restructure, please get a clue about communicating with others, or at least with me–describing people you’re communicating with as “idiots” does little to interest them in further communication with you.” (at the end of a long comment)

    However, he let through this comment and did not admonish the person who posted it:

    Anonymous said…

    JW is a moron, sorry….
    September 15, 2008 12:30 PM

    Yup, that’s it. “Made me think that you are an idiot” within the context of a long post is inappropriate, but “JW is a moron,” and nothing else somehow stands as a valuable contribution to the discussion. Why? Because one criticizes Macon D, and the other criticizes one of Macon D’s critics.

    Comment by Restructure! — September 20, 2008 @ 11:35 pm | Reply

  17. Do you know what my first thought was with this “Anonymous” poster calling me moron? That Macon wrote this comment.

    Comment by jwbe — September 20, 2008 @ 11:40 pm | Reply

  18. Nah, I’m not going to assume that.

    Anyway, Macon D’s style is to make fun of you because your first language isn’t English, and to call you an “arrogant European” because you said America was the “center of violent arrogance”.

    (I’m Canadian and I think what you said about American violent arrogance is accurate, but I guess that just shows that I’m an “arrogant Canadian”. Human rights and social equality in the United States is behind the rest of the developed world, and American foreign policy affects us all, but I guess we’re just being elitist for thinking the death penalty is barbaric and all.)

    Comment by Restructure! — September 21, 2008 @ 12:21 am | Reply

  19. Great posts, Restructure! #14 was superb. I just want to hear Macon’s excuse…
    Personally, I’d put “idiot” on the same scale as “desperate,” “bullshit”-spewing “liar.” But that’s me. lol

    Comment by Nquest — September 21, 2008 @ 12:24 am | Reply

  20. JW, say it ain’t so…

    I can call him quite a few names and can also insult some of his readers. And my race won’t work against me.

    Now if “name-calling” isn’t the issue: what is it? Surely this can’t be about race. Restructure is non-white. It’s also clear Restructure disagrees with Macon quite a bit and was the first person to question Macon’s intellectual dishonesty. Remember that?

    Restructure said Macon was being intellectually dishonest, I agreed and I was the one Macon directed his “are you calling me a liar” angst towards. Beyond that, Restructure is right… Macon has all kinds of Double Standards that revolve around Macon creating special privileges for himself and special rules that others have to follow while him and his supporters don’t.

    Comment by Nquest — September 21, 2008 @ 12:35 am | Reply

  21. Macon D has censored my comments twice. The second time I asked—in response to his admitting that he was a slow learner—if he was a slow learner with respect to race or a slow learner in general, but after I complained about the censoring of that comment on this blog, he restored the comment.

    How many times were your comments censored, Nquest?

    Comment by Restructure! — September 21, 2008 @ 1:09 am | Reply

  22. I haven’t counted, to tell the truth. I know it’s been more than two times. I think he rejected two posts or more in the first thread where he started screening posts. I can count at least two times Macon has rejected my posts when I didn’t call anyone any ‘names’ or take any perceived swipes at them — #1 being a post I already highlighted here and #2 being the one from the thread mentioned in my topic where he said “I get what you’re saying…”

    He’s had all sorts of reasons for rejecting posts of mine.

    [Nquest: in most cases, I’m no longer going to publish comments that refer to the comments of others made long ago in other threads. It rarely serves a useful/productive point, though if it seems that any cross-thread comments do serve such a point, then I’ll publish those.]
    http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/2008/07/ask-for-suggestions.html?showComment=1216177320000#c6664188197659529115

    So, to my recollection, that’s at least two threads where he’s rejected at least two posts of mine. So I think you can see why I lost count a long time ago.

    Comment by Nquest — September 21, 2008 @ 2:08 am | Reply

  23. I see. I have no idea. Maybe it’s because he didn’t like you in the beginning, and he might have liked me in the beginning because I was too polite back then.*

    I think I’m done with commenting on SWPD, since we’re not welcome there.

    I feel that changing the minds of the white people there is a lost cause, since they think that were are derailing “their” discussion on race.

    _________________________
    * There’s another post that resonated with me last week, The Failures of Anti-Racism by Davita Cuttita of Pregnant Drug-Dealing Prostitutes. I don’t know if it was about SWPD, since they usually approve of SWPD and Macon D, but I know the feeling, and it’s a great post. They also posted one of my favourite Malcolm X quotes:

    “…I, for one, as a Muslim believe that the White man is intelligent enough. If he were made to realize how Black people really feel and how fed up we are without that old compromising sweet talk (of) ‘Why, you’re the one that makes it hard for yourself!’

    The White Man believes you when you go to him with that old sweet talk because you’ve been sweet talking him eversince he brought you here. STOP sweet talking him, tell him how you feel! Tell him what kind of hell you’ve been catching and let him know that if he’s not ready to clean his house up, he shouldn’t have a house.

    It should catch on fire—and burn down.”

    –Malcolm X

    Anyway, I think this is a problem we people of colour generally have, sugar-coating our concerns and blunting the barbs of our criticisms, falsely believing that the more we compromise our positions, the more our positions will be taken seriously. It doesn’t work, because white people will think that everything is okay, since they already want so badly to believe it, to believe that the world in which they prosper is just.

    Comment by Restructure! — September 21, 2008 @ 2:50 am | Reply

  24. “I think this is a problem we people of colour generally have, sugar-coating our concerns…”

    I think that might be part of the problem: I’ve never been so diplomatic and, if I had to choose, I’d prefer Malcolm X to Dr. King. I do remember you saying you were ‘too polite’. Maybe that was part of it but I was ‘polite’ when I first started posting at SWPD. I’m just short on tolerating someone trying to blow smoke up my a$$, let alone someone trying to pawn off sloppy logic as thoughtful reflections…

    Comment by Nquest — September 21, 2008 @ 3:09 am | Reply

  25. You mentioning the Failures of Anti-Racism thread reminded me of how my ALL WHITE ARE RACIST thread had me thinking about the classic “The White Anti-Racist Is an Oxymoron” open letter.

    Comment by Nquest — September 21, 2008 @ 3:18 am | Reply

  26. The first time I read the “White Anti-Racist Is an Oxymoron” open letter, I thought it was hostile and I didn’t fully understand it. I read it again now, and it makes perfect, reasonable sense. Damn, I see what the author means now.

    This is great:

    So what does this mean for the future of white anti-racists? This might mean to figure out ways in which whiteness needs to die as a social structure and as an identity in which you organize your anti-racist work. What this looks like in practice may not be so clear but I will attempt to give some suggestions here. First, don’t call us, we’ll call you. If we need your resources, we will contact you. But don’t show up, flaunt your power in our faces and then get angry when we resent the fact that you have so many resources we don’t and that we are not grateful for this arrangement. And don’t get mad because you can’t make decisions in the process. Why do you need to? Second, stop speaking for us. We can talk for ourselves. Third, stop trying to point out internal contradictions in our communities, we know what they are, we are struggling around them, and I really don’t know how white people can be helpful to non-whites to clear these up. Fourth, don’t ever say some shit to me about how you feel silenced, marginalized, discriminated against, or put in your place as a white person. Period. Fifth, stop calling me sister. I will tell you when you are family. Finally, start thinking of what it would mean, in terms of actual structured social arrangements, for whiteness and white identity—even the white antiracist kind (because there really is no redeemable or reformed white identity)—to be destroyed.

    Comment by Restructure! — September 21, 2008 @ 3:40 am | Reply

  27. Anyway, Macon D’s style is to make fun of you because your first language isn’t English, and to call you an “arrogant European” because you said America was the “center of violent arrogance”.

    my real life experience with people like Macon is that they first try “to make friendship” and when they realize that this isn’t possible they try “to destroy” one’s reputation.
    Remember that Macon invited me and nobody else to be a guest-writer on his blog, despite the fact that I am not American and most of my knowledge about American racism is knowledge via internet.
    He didn’t ask you or Nquest, despite the fact that Macon says that non-white people know more about whites than whites themselves.
    I think, also based on my real life experience, that he tried to use the knowledge I have and at the same time trying to be still superior, the educator and the one who tries to dictate the way I should go.

    JW, say it ain’t so…

    while I can say that together we posted on msbs, together we were censored and together we were banned, I think I had ‘to work harder’ to get banned. Sometimes white Americans thought I was Black and on German msbs they sometimes think I am Turkish as if somebody white can’t have a different mind-set than mainstream, and we two were ‘lumped together’ as if we aren’t two different people and I know that in all cases your style was an alleged issue for them.
    I also can remember the difference in treatment of Ceci (who was a Black woman) and you, and the difference in style was that she was ‘nderstanding or so. In the end I think that this is for whites a superior issue. I personally never had any problem with your style, because it is based on facts and highlights contradictions and if you wrote “diplomatic” or not, the message remains the same and it is the message many white readers don’t like.
    I also thought about those whites like Shewolf, who said out of the blue to be ‘on your side’. I also believe that this is some sort of superior issue, trying to get your approval would signal other whites how special they are, because they realize that getting your approval isn’t so easy. And when they realize that they can’t dominate you, while their white entitlement tells them that they are used to dominate Black people, they start censoring you and finally will ban you.
    Macon called you an “abuser”, he deleted this response to you again, but this is his thinking about you. An abuser is always somebody in control and in the position of power, while the abused doesn’t have control and power, so it is ‘interesting’ that he as the owner of the blog calls somebody an abuser, when in realitiy he abuses his blog to dominate and to dismiss opinions he doesn’t like.
    I also think that many thoughts he wants to sell as “white training” are his individual thoughts, trying to evade responsibility by telling that many whites are that way. When he comes up with “Get used to Blackness” and then his reducing Black culture to music etc, I mean, anybody serious doesn’t connect a presidential candidate with just music, daps etc.. Berlin people for example didn’t come to see Obama dancing or singing…
    I think, that Macon has to get “used to Blackness” in that way to realize Black people as fully human. He doesn’t have this issue with other PoC I think.
    These are just my thoughts.

    Comment by jwbe — September 21, 2008 @ 1:23 pm | Reply

  28. Macon called you an “abuser”… but this is his thinking about you. An abuser is always somebody in control and in the position of power, while the abused doesn’t have control and power, so it is ‘interesting’ that he as the owner of the blog calls somebody an abuser…

    I forgot about that. Thanks for reminding me. I could say more but I’d rather just open up the floor for Macon to explain himself. If I recall, Macon said he was abused and likened me/my behavior to such an abuser. Maybe it’s me but as far as personal insults “desperate”, “bullshit”-spewing “liar” isn’t even remotely in the same category as calling someone (me) an abuser.

    This also coincides with my question about hijacking. I have no idea how I “abused” or “hijacked” anything while posting on Macon’s blog. I think Macon (and other people) have an issue with someone (me) who often has a counterpoint to most of the points they make which explains why it was so important for Macon to launch a preemptive strike (because he “knew…”) and have THE LAST WORDS which meant that he would not allow me to post anything else, everyone else was okay, because I “had my say.”

    Comment by Nquest — September 21, 2008 @ 4:06 pm | Reply

  29. OT: how do you find certain comments on Macon’s blog?

    I tried without success to find the one comment where Macon said to Nquest that he is not used to get orders

    Comment by jwbe — September 21, 2008 @ 6:04 pm | Reply

  30. I don’t know how Macon defines ‘abuse’, he calls the one thread “Abuse their children” http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/2008/09/abuse-their-children.html without indicating what kind of abuse he is talking about.

    If he talks about emotional abuse he should also understand what kind of crime (I consider e. a. as a sort of crime) he accuses you. Emotional abuse causes severe psychological damage to the victim, so yes I think that he should explain a lot why he feels free to make such an accusation.
    Not being able or willing with being challenged is something very different than being abused.

    Comment by jwbe — September 21, 2008 @ 6:22 pm | Reply

  31. JW, for your information:

    MACON: “…For me, a major difference in trying to interact with the two of you [JW] IS a matter of style. That difference, for me, comes about on a personal level. I’m an abuse survivor, and Nq’s style comes across to me as hectoring, insulting, bullying, and dismissive. I don’t at all read it as a “black” or non-white style. Instead, it strongly reminds me of the communication styles of abusers I’ve encountered. As a result, interacting with Nquest literally makes me feel sick. However, in the interests of the anti-racist labor I’m performing on this blog, I’ve struggled through those feelings, and through the thickets of his style to find the points he’s making, and then to assess whether I think they’re valid…”

    Note: Macon deleted the post.

    As for the his comment about “taking orders”, suggesting that I was “ordering” him to, of all things, actually explain his “there is a difference” comment directed to me… HERE IT IS:

    In his thread, “hide their feelings about race behind a calm white mask”, I asked >>> and he responded {{{:

    >>> “How does that square with your claim that Whites don’t express… collective anger?”
    {{{ “nquest, there’s a difference between having deepseated feelings and openly expressing them in collective ways.”
    >>> “Okay, Macon. Explain the difference.”
    {{{ “I’m not used to taking orders. . . are you really asking me, or rather telling me, to explain the difference between having deepset feelings and openly expressing them?”
    >>> “…why do you feel I gave you an order? What is that all about?”
    {{{ “Because you wrote, “Okay, Macon. Explain the difference,” instead of asking me to do so. (Actually, I was letting my common white tendency to insist on “polite” discussion enact itself there. Sort of in jest. But such nuances don’t come across in discussion threads well, do they?)”

    That exchanged happened on June 2th. The now erased post where he likened me to “abusers” was on July 11th. Macon’s contentious “refuse to listen to Black anger” thread was posted on May 28th. I had posted on SWPD for a couple of weeks by then with Macon thanking me for points I made, etc.

    In the “refuse to listen to Black anger” thread, however, Macon tried to hide the fact that he felt that Rev. Jeremiah Wright was racist or had made “racist” statements. I point I’ve never agreed with. Come to find out, before that May 28th thread, Macon had indeed labeled Rev. Wright/his statements “racist” apparently thinking no one would challenge him on that assertion. Well, he was and he changed it to “racially charged” when an anonymous poster questioned him but Macon never made a distinction to explain the different terminology which can easily be interpreted as the politically correct way to say “racist.”

    So, PYRO… that would be one situation where I will say Macon wanted to make sure he looked “enlightened.”

    Comment by Nquest — September 21, 2008 @ 8:18 pm | Reply

  32. >(I’m Canadian and I think what you said about American violent arrogance is accurate, but I guess that just shows that I’m an “arrogant Canadian”. Human rights and social equality in the United States is behind the rest of the developed world, and American foreign policy affects us all, but I guess we’re just being elitist for thinking the death penalty is barbaric and all.)

    What I somehow miss in American white anti-racism is the understanding of being American and what that means in a globalized world, where many American decisions impact the world. There is as it seems no chance to influence America from outside, but America feels free to place her military all over the world and bullying Russia with her desire to place missiles in Poland and some other nations in Europe. Just as one example.
    The end of white supremacy would also mean the end of American supremacy, an issue rarely if ever raised by white American anti-racists. They are ‘concerned’ to be allies to Poc and already this indicates the lack of understanding that it is about more than just ‘helping’.
    I also don’t get the impression that many white Americans truly understand what a presidential election would mean and that it isn’t a “who do I like most” competition, but that it is an election which will impact the future of the entire world.
    White American entitlement – white Americans as a collective never had to feel the pain and wars they impacted on other people or nations. As somebody from outside I find the way white America elects their leaders quite scary and also this naivety as it seems that the distructive impact of Bush’s politics will disappear when he is out of office.
    The same way America will execute somebody who is innocent, America invaded Iraq based on lies and will invade any other nation America feels ‘necessary’ to satisfy her greed. And nobody from outside can stop them.
    While America rearms herself and improves her nuclear weapons they disarm other nations and call on other nations to “work with them”. Bush’s fucked up ‘you are either with us or against us’, this mind-set, I don’t know. In the end it is only about money and power and I think in the final end there can’t be a winner even if America seems to believe that there is something to win.
    But yes, I am the arrogant European, because white Americans can’t realize as it seems that they are not the only ones and that not all is just about them.

    Comment by jwbe — September 21, 2008 @ 9:58 pm | Reply

  33. I think American privilege is separate from white privilege, as Americans of color, even antiracist Americans of color, act in similarly to white Americans. At first I was completely baffled, since they didn’t see the connection between their American-centric worldviews and white-centric worldviews, but I guess that’s how privilege works. I used to be confused finding that men of colour understood racism but not sexism, since both racism and sexism share so many obvious similarities to me, but again, I guess that’s how privilege works.

    Comment by Restructure! — September 21, 2008 @ 10:11 pm | Reply

  34. Well, Restructure, you have to understand how POC, men in particular, are dipped in the same culture as Whites. Black women have always had two battles which included the external issues of race and the external/internal issues involving sexism. Of course, they can speak much more authoritatively than I can (I’m Black but not a woman, of course) and since we’re talking about ‘how privilege works’, Black women have also had an extra-battle of having to fight against the paternalism, etc. of White feminists.

    Nevertheless, the sexism or patriarchy present in the American social movements of the 60’s and 70’s — the civil rights and Black Power movements — have long since been discussed as an issue then and now.

    Comment by Nquest — September 21, 2008 @ 11:00 pm | Reply

  35. I do wonder what American POC who are anti-racist (which, IMO, is different from POC who merely say they are against it; the same as White anti-racist comprises a completely different category of people as liberal Whites who may very well be “colorblind”) you’ve come across. But maybe you can elaborate on the separateness of American vs. White privilege.

    I’m asking because, as I see, POC who are anti-racist or critical race thinkers tend to be the sharpest critics of Americanism particularly American foreign policy. IMO, they represent true leftist, if not radical leftist, whose overall critique is, again, highly critical of American foreign and domestic policy.

    Maybe you and JW can help me understand what you mean by ‘American privilege’ and how American POC just don’t get it — don’t recognize or acknowledge said American privilege. I know I tend to think White Americans don’t make a distinction and, IMO, their American-ness is tied to their Whiteness and vice versa. Indeed, it’s standard fare in my on-line circles among African-Americans to point to the times when White Americans reveal how White = American to them.

    Anyway… both points (about sexism that occurs among anti-racists and blindness to privilege among American POC) are especially interesting to me.

    Comment by Nquest — September 21, 2008 @ 11:13 pm | Reply

  36. Well, the American antiracist PoC I’m thinking of are Carmen and Latoya from Racialicious. Their critical thinking skills with respect to race are razor sharp, and they obviously are smartly critical of sexism as well. However, they are strangely clueless with respect to any knowledge of American privilege.

    Carmen wished everyone a happy 4th of July.

    When I thought it was strange that Racialicious staff tagged Canadian and all non-American race news as ‘international’, Latoya thought that as a Canadian, I wanted Canadian news to be considered ‘American’ instead of ‘international’. (Americans generally think that calling a non-American country ‘American’ is a compliment, since Americans think (implicitly) that America is superior.)

    I forgot who, but some Racialicious person (staff? reader? I don’t remember) was discussing world travelling while PoC, and this person mentioned using their American identity to get better service in some countries (in other countries, American identity would hurt you). They took the attitude of “My country rules the world, so you better treat me with respect!” Basically, this person was aware of their American privilege and the power that the US has over the rest of the world, and used it to their advantage, reinforcing the hierarchy that values American lives over the lives of non-Americans. The lives of African Americans are considered more valuable than the lives of Africans, for example.

    Comment by Restructure! — September 22, 2008 @ 12:26 am | Reply

  37. Don’t know what you think about Cuba but this hardly fits the American privilege profile in terms of how, in this case, an African-American feminist sees the world. It does, however, show the American privilege of her critics.

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/21/20948/3113/233/605909

    As far as the 4th of July… Well, plenty of folks in my circle often refer back to Frederick Douglass and reflect on Thanksgiving in much the same way… But, of course, there are those who are heavily invested in their identity as Americans and say in a manner similar to Whites that the USA is the “greatest country.” It’s the way we are socialized…

    I’ve read bits and pieces, here and there at Racialicious. So I don’t know where they stand. From what little I know, I would characterize them as “sugar-coaters” — i.e. they take a very diplomatic approach. Most of the people I’m thinking of may be measured but they esteem people like Malcolm X…

    Comment by Nquest — September 22, 2008 @ 1:14 am | Reply

  38. Hmm, I see what you mean now. I’ve only read The Color Purple, and Alice Walker seems to be an internationalist; she thinks very differently from most Americans. It seems Malcolm X was an internationalist as well, after he started travelling outside America.

    However, it seems like most American PoC don’t think like that. Carmen and Latoya don’t seem to think like that, and many American PoC commenters of Racialicious show their American privilege.

    Maybe you’re right that they are overly diplomatic. I didn’t notice, probably because I sugar-coat more than I need to, which is, theoretically, sugar-coating at all.

    As for the 4th of July, the problem is assuming that everyone who reads Racialicious is American. (It’s like wishing everyone “Merry Christmas” to an audience that includes people who are not Christian, such as religious Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, atheists, etc., while not wishing “Happy Hanukkah”, “Happy Eid-Fitr”, “Happy Diwali”, etc. on the appropriate days or acknowledging non-Christian holidays. It signals that some kind of people are more important and visible than other kinds of people.)

    Comment by Restructure! — September 22, 2008 @ 2:00 am | Reply

  39. Actually, I thought this Racialicious post was kind of pathetic, i.e., too compromising, to the point of being inappropriate: Are We Too Intense?

    Comment by Restructure! — September 22, 2008 @ 2:05 am | Reply

  40. I just did a quick, spot-read of the “Too Intense” article and the first thing that stands out to me or, really the first thing that pushes one of my pet-peeve buttons, is this idea of reducing so-called race relations to mere interpersonal relationships. I also have an issue with the “acceptance” frame. It lends, all too easily, to the kind of “it’s better than you think it is” relativism which takes the focus off of fully respecting people’s humanity. That kind of attitude always makes me reflect on what Dr. King said:

    “I’m tired of marching for something that should have been mine at birth.”

    That fact should never be lost. Neither should the length of time it took people to get to the point where it is now. Personally, I see no consolation and damn sure little that’s “positive” in counting century after century of long, protracted, had to fight them and drag them kickin’ and screamin’ “progress.”

    I really didn’t plan on writing so much but I did say this was a pet-peeve of mine. lol What I wanted to limit my post to was to simply ask you what you found that was “too compromising” and why you felt the author’s self-consciousness about being ‘intense’ and, in so doing, being too ‘pessimistic’ was inappropriate.

    Note: C-SPAN Booknotes, from the programming ad I saw, featured the author of the book:
    Rumors of Our Progress Have Been Greatly Exaggerated:
    Why Women’s Lives Aren’t Getting Any Easier–And How We Can Make Real Progress For Ourselves and Our Daughters

    That’s my sentiment exactly when it comes to “race relations.”

    Comment by Nquest — September 22, 2008 @ 2:37 am | Reply

  41. Here are some sentences that bothered me:

    While she was certainly a realist and did not think that America was all daisies for people of color, she noted that people are probably more accepting and less racist than I would assume.

    First of all, what the heck is her friend’s point? Is there an acceptable level of racism, such that if the racism doesn’t reach a certain threshhold, the racism is not a problem?

    Secondly, how are they measuring this? How does her friend have the ability to “objectively” compare Wendi’s perception of the amount of racism with the actual amount of racism?

    And considering she is white, she certainly may have heard some things from, say, other whites, that would be considered racist if they had really come up.

    Not if her white friend doesn’t consider it racist herself, having white privilege and all.

    The more and more I thought about her assertions, the more I realized that she was right. I wasn’t giving people enough credit. I was suffering from racism paranoia of sorts. A form of self-fulfilling prophecy, if you will, in which I assumed that others were racist, and so I didn’t approach them, befriend them, become close to them, or share as much of myself with them as my friends of color, or even more specifically, my black friends, because I feared the worst.

    It is not paranoia to assume that white people have white privilege that they are not aware of. It is not paranoia to assume that non-white people do not have white privilege and are aware of white privilege and racism, and will probably understand when you share stories of said white privilege and racism with them.

    Come on.

    I feared one day they would say something racist or betray my friendship or do something to make me say, “see I told you,’ and regret having befriended them in the first place.

    She is incorrectly viewing racism as a personal problem instead of a systemic problem. White people *are* going to say racist things, and this does not mean that they are terrible people. Whether or not it’s worth dumping them for depends on the extremity of the racism. PoC also say racist things against other PoC, and even against their own racial group. Both white and non-white people are socialized this way and internalize the values of a racist society (unless they are socialized differently), but white people have white privilege and it’s not presumptuous or unwarranted to assume that their white privilege makes them blind to white privilege.

    My believing that everyone was racist until proven otherwise was limiting me.

    It’s not limiting to believe that all white people have white privilege until proven otherwise (since this is true by definition). It is not limiting to assume that all people with white privilege are unaware of their privilege until proven otherwise.

    Argh. PaulPortland’s #36 also articulates well what I think about the topic. The word “racism”, for Wendi’s white friend, does not mean what she thinks it means, when we use the word “racism”.

    Comment by Restructure! — September 22, 2008 @ 3:24 am | Reply

  42. First of all, what the heck is her friend’s point? Is there an acceptable level of racism, such that if the racism doesn’t reach a certain threshold, the racism is not [that big of] a problem?

    That’s exactly my point and I still fought Wendi’s “acceptance” seeking and interpersonal relationships frame. I think the real issue is what she thought and, now, thinks about White people and racism.

    She clearly had some preconceived notions about Whites being racist. It’s almost like she was raised to think she was going to be physically attacked or called a racial slur by most of the White people she came across. It’s as if her experience with her ‘former friend’ (the one who casually used the Memphis+Africa slur) didn’t compose as significant a cognition (talk about cognitive dissonance) as her experience with her ‘optimistic’ friend. Somehow, the fact that it apparently took a while for Wendi to find out how her Memphis+Africa friend really felt didn’t factor into Wendi’s zeal to form the trusting assumption that her ‘optimistic’ friend would just as readily tell her about racist views exchanged in all-White company as she would anything else.

    She is incorrectly viewing racism as a personal problem instead of a systemic problem.

    Yes, that’s exactly my point and I’m glad you quoted a comment I missed reading. She both gives credence to Macon’s idea of POC withholding trust while at the same time contradicting it. I know quite a few Black people who have White friends (lol), my family included, but, given what I know from those all-Black conversation moments, I know they did not seek those interracial friends because of some desire to be friends with someone White. I also know that those friendships had little or no bearing on their thoughts on racism. This is why it is important to know history which, in the US, includes White sharecroppers having cordial friendships with Black sharecroppers (you know, during Jim Crow). So the issue has never been about being friends…

    My believing that everyone was racist until proven otherwise was limiting me.

    Hmmmm…. I wonder how that was so when she was quick to trust her ‘optimistic’ dubbed “realist” friend even while there was nothing “self-fulfilling” about the ‘former’ friend’s Memphis+Africa slur.

    It’s not limiting to believe that all white people have white privilege until proven otherwise

    Ha! Ha! You sound just like the blogger Macon quoted in haste for support of his withhold trust idea.

    Comment by Nquest — September 22, 2008 @ 5:12 am | Reply

  43. PoC also say racist things against other PoC, and even against their own racial group.

    First thought, (a) good point. First thought, (b) don’t we have a thread about this?

    Second thought, ‘and don’t I know it.’ I’m more or less the self-loathing police on one board I post on.

    Comment by nquest2xl — September 22, 2008 @ 5:25 am | Reply

  44. Restructure, thanks for the link. One of the posters said Racialicious was pretty “mild” as opposed to intense. Anyway, I’ve always like what I read from Latoya Peterson.

    Comment by nquest2xl — September 22, 2008 @ 5:57 am | Reply

  45. >Maybe you and JW can help me understand what you mean by ‘American privilege’ and how American POC just don’t get it — don’t recognize or acknowledge said American privilege.

    I was talking about American supremacy, not privilege, but I think that there exists the privilege of living in industrialized countries. I can elaborate if you want.

    Comment by jwbe — September 22, 2008 @ 2:29 pm | Reply

  46. >They took the attitude of “My country rules the world, so you better treat me with respect!” Basically, this person was aware of their American privilege and the power that the US has over the rest of the world, and used it to their advantage, reinforcing the hierarchy that values American lives over the lives of non-Americans.

    Where I always don’t know how to react is when Americans, regardless race, tell me “oh, I know Germany, I was there with the army”. For me the American military in Germany is American occupation. But for many Americans it seems to be absolutely normal to occupy other countries.

    Comment by jwbe — September 22, 2008 @ 2:35 pm | Reply

  47. MACON: “…For me, a major difference in trying to interact with the two of you [JW] IS a matter of style. That difference, for me, comes about on a personal level. I’m an abuse survivor, and Nq’s style comes across to me as hectoring, insulting, bullying, and dismissive. I don’t at all read it as a “black” or non-white style. Instead, it strongly reminds me of the communication styles of abusers I’ve encountered. As a result, interacting with Nquest literally makes me feel sick. However, in the interests of the anti-racist labor I’m performing on this blog, I’ve struggled through those feelings, and through the thickets of his style to find the points he’s making, and then to assess whether I think they’re valid…”

    funny how that works, because I can’t remember that he ever asked how any of us (Restructure, Nquest and I) feel about his writing.
    He calls challenging his contradictions and racism abuse. While I can understand that for him your style may be difficult to deal with – what is he doing when he encounters racists or people with problematic attitudes who will ‘challenge’ him on a very different level and are people in real life? What does he call such people? Calm and rational?

    Comment by jwbe — September 22, 2008 @ 3:28 pm | Reply

  48. After reading this article:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/22/opinion/22observer.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

    Macon’s true mindset becomes obvious to me and explains some of his weird posts on his blog

    Comment by jwbe — September 22, 2008 @ 8:50 pm | Reply

  49. I can understand that for him your style may be difficult…

    Okay. Help me out here. Be as objective or considerate as you can. Explain what it is about my “style” that’s difficult and what would make someone like Macon or any of the other people who have an issue with my “style” feel like I was “hectoring, insulting, bullying”

    I have an idea what the “dismissive” stuff is about. Though I found his objectionable theories to be founded on faulty logic, Macon had this expectation that I should give him credit for some part of what he said as opposed to me categorically rejecting his ideas. Essentially, he wanted something he could point to that I found acceptable/truthful/etc.

    I see that as the way a lot of people communicate whether they are honest when they say “I get what you’re saying” and “you have a good point but” or not. I also think Macon felt rebuffed because the type of grade school bs kids run on substitute teachers didn’t work with me. Macon would, IMO, just say anything he thought I wanted to hear — just assuming a little honey and bs would do the trick — but then was surprised when it didn’t.

    Take, for instance, the time when he was trying to have his cake and eat it too — i.e. when he faked like he was offering me the opportunity to submit suggestions to revise the hotly contested “express amazement” content. The fact that Macon presented that “opportunity” as a “here, stop complaining”, ” type of challenge as opposed to a genuine request for correcting suggestions didn’t matter. I wasn’t supposed to view it like that.

    The fact that Macon had argued me up and down that there was really nothing wrong with his terribly unsubstantiated idea but then, all-of-a-sudden, snapped at me practically demanding that I offer revision suggestions or STFU (anything to make me stop “hectoring” him for substantial evidence for his assertion) didn’t matter either. I was just supposed to play along like I was too stupid to know what was going on or too scared (out of fear of him or the loss of posting privileges or an internet reputation, whatever) to call bs by it’s name.

    So the idea that he used this weird “agree to disagree” idea as an explanation is telling. People actually feel like they are entitled to their opinions when they are based on a heap of ridiculous bs and, worst, like anyone with a brain is supposed to view their ideas as valid or equally valid as ideas/opinions that have more facts and firmer logic to them. Not only that but somehow now I’m supposed to accept his bs DOUBLE STANDARD that, since he’s White, he’s an authority on White people (even when his ideas can’t withstand scrutiny and requires leaps in logic) when I apparently didn’t know what I was talking about when it came to him accusing Black people (a significant amount of them) of harboring attitudes that forbid them to extend trust to White people…. based on some bs idea Whites have that they are supposed to automatically be trusted during first encounters???

    Of course, we (you and I, JW) both noted how ridiculous that idea was. Of course, Macon could never answer why would any human being extend trust to a stranger.

    Comment by Nquest — September 22, 2008 @ 9:22 pm | Reply

  50. JW please elaborate on your thoughts regarding the article, Macon, his mindset and his ‘weird’ posts.

    I don’t know what connection you’re drawing and I would have no idea what drives Macon to come up with his most questionable thread-topics.

    Comment by Nquest — September 22, 2008 @ 9:32 pm | Reply

  51. >Okay. Help me out here. Be as objective or considerate as you can. Explain what it is about my “style” that’s difficult and what would make someone like Macon or any of the other people who have an issue with my “style” feel like I was “hectoring, insulting, bullying”

    My this is difficult, you know I am a fan of your style. I like it because you make somebody’s contradictions, baseless assumptions etc. so visible. It was your style which helped me to get another understanding of people like CF for example and it is because of your use of facts I got another understanding of many things. You make it just so clear, at least to me, you highlight important things, regardless if these are flaws in somebody’s logic or when you analyze history/speeches etc.
    I also like the fact that you don’t make a difference of who says the bs and posting with you also helped me to get another racial awareness.
    But I could also watch the ‘receiving end’ of your style, people who make stuff up based on assumptions etc. And then they can’t evade or hide. I think that this is the point for them. They are “forced” to live the consequences of their own behavior/words.
    The handshake-thread for example. This is made up stuff by Macon, like some other things he writes. I think that it needs character to admit mistakes. It would be so easy without all the emotional drama of Macon to just admit the mistake, but he tries to defend his baseless fiction and you don’t let people come away with something like this.
    Firm people can intimidate some people already with their presence, and I think that they use your style just as an excuse.

    And with that I can elaborate on the article. Racism in Germany and America differs to a certain degree in that way, that in Germany racism is sometimes/often much more blatant. What Germans would tell you much more directly stright into your face, at least online, white Americans hide much more and it took me awhile to really realize this.
    The connection I draw to Macon and also his claim, that you would give him orders or would abuse him is that I believe that he, perhaps truly not so consciously believes that you “don’t know your place” according to some/many I don’t know white Americans including Macon. This also explains his inability to respect you or to accept any of your criticism, and all your criticism is based on facts.
    This came to my mind while reading the article and this sentence then: “In the Old South, black men and women who were competent, confident speakers on matters of importance were termed “disrespectful,” the implication being that all good Negroes bowed, scraped, grinned and deferred to their white betters. ” reminds me of this “insisting on polite discussion” and his “calm and rational” claim as well as his “get used to Blackness” with reducing Blackness to “entertaining people” (music etc.)
    And he may have real life experiences with Black people, but he doesn’t truly listening to them, also when he claims that he reads books written by Black people, his white mindset makes it impossible to him to emphasize with that what is written. His understanding is the interpretation of somebody who feels above and feels entitled to distort Black reality so that it fits his projections.
    The only experts on racism towards Black people are Black people and nobody else. What Macon is doing or trying to do is denying your reality.

    Comment by jwbe — September 22, 2008 @ 11:07 pm | Reply

  52. Thank you. For the record, I don’t know if I agree with putting Macon’s reactions in that Jim Crow context but I can’t help but feel that he has/had a bigger problem with criticism coming from me-and-my-Blackness than he had with criticism he received from anyone else. Again, I reflect on the different reactions Macon made to perceived swipes at his intelligence, etc. Though he definitely had an issue with both me and Restructure on the occasions when he perceived those swipes, his reaction to me (questioning how intently he had read/drawn from Black intellectuals) was much more elevated than his response to Restructure (who questioned how new Macon was to studying/examining racism/Whiteness).

    IMO, his reaction to me was uncalled for and over the top. He acted like I called him a dummy or stupid (which I did not) which you know I have no problems doing when I deem it appropriate. With Restructure, he was offended but part of the response seemed strained — like he had to force himself to be mad in the “you can’t get mad at me sort of way” that people who otherwise respect each other have a little spat then promptly smooth over their differences. JMO…

    I do have to say though (and I’d have to check the chronology) that Macon’s emotional explosion may have come after I pressed him on the Jeremiah Wright question (the “refuse to listen to black anger” thread). That was where I perceived him trying to insult my intelligence with backtracking, track covering excuses and face saving moves which caused me to point out how he seemed “desperate”… to say anything to excuse his questionable (and shifting) terms I felt were used to hide the fact that he really felt Jeremiah Wright was or said something “racist” (something I mentioned somewhere here recently).

    His blow went like this ( me = >>> | him = {{{ ) :

    >>> “It’s disappointing that the Black intellectuals you’ve been exposed to haven’t penetrated your consciousness on that very basic point.”

    {{{ “Right, I must be an idiot who wasn’t able to finish high school, so hard is it for “basic points” to penetrate my thick skull.”

    What someone’s intelligence-as-grade level has to do with them having a conscious sensitivity or awareness of people’s racial sensitivities which, ironically, had everything to do with viewing African Americans as intelligent human beings as opposed to people “appreciated” for their music, style and cool… Well, obviously, I don’t know and didn’t know then.

    Comment by Nquest — September 22, 2008 @ 11:45 pm | Reply

  53. *sighs* Macon D’s quotations are farcical. Understanding black intellectuals requires only a high school education, apparently.

    Comment by Restructure! — September 23, 2008 @ 2:21 am | Reply

  54. I never looked at it like that but his peculiar offense taken over my use of the words “(very) basic point” probably deserve it. And, of course, that reminds me of how quick the knee-jerk and phony outrage Macon drummed up after I followed you using the term “intellectual dishonesty” — which he wanted to turn into flat “dishonesty”. As we know, he didn’t all up in arms claiming to be offended because you correctly noted how he was not showing intellectual integrity and was, indeed, being intellectually dishonest…

    Oh, snap! My exact statement was:

    So Restructure is right when [she] notes how you’re intellectually dishonest.

    Then Macon had the nerve to ask me what’s the difference between someone being “dishonest” [A] vs. being “intellectually dishonest” [B] just so he could stir up the fake outrage to turn a critique of his shifting arguments (him initially saying “x” then, when “x” is put under scrutiny, saying he didn’t say “x” but instead said “xy”) into a personal assault on his character that, somehow, he only saw coming from me.

    Now that sh*t is farcical and, I guess, his high school never taught him the difference between A and B.

    Comment by nquest2xl — September 23, 2008 @ 3:12 am | Reply

  55. I didn’t look at it like that initially, either, but that’s the only connection I can make between your sentence and his response.

    Comment by Restructure! — September 23, 2008 @ 3:26 am | Reply

  56. It does make you wonder. Like I said, I have no idea what the connection is.

    Comment by nquest2xl — September 23, 2008 @ 4:57 am | Reply

  57. >Thank you. For the record, I don’t know if I agree with putting Macon’s reactions in that Jim Crow context but I can’t help but feel that he has/had a bigger problem with criticism coming from me-and-my-Blackness than he had with criticism he received from anyone else.

    You are welcome. I don’t know if I am correct, it’s just the thoughts I have

    Comment by jwbe — September 23, 2008 @ 11:16 am | Reply

  58. Wow. You three are clueless! What a load of OC tedium and trivia on this blog! I read macon d’s blog regularly because it points out all sorts of things about racism and white people I hadn’t thought about before. it also changes my behavior as a white person who deals with POC daily in my work. I also read the comments there. He clearly doesn’t have a problem with Nquest because he’s black–get real! he has a problem with him because Nquest acts like a total asshole. Not only that, his comments are off-base. His logic repeatedly fails. It’s clear you all have a problem with macon d himself, for whatever reason, rather than with what he writes. Get over it, and get positive somehow.

    Comment by gypsy rose — September 26, 2008 @ 3:14 am | Reply

  59. >it also changes my behavior as a white person

    in what ways did your behavior change?

    Comment by jwbe — September 26, 2008 @ 11:36 am | Reply

  60. Gypsy Rose, thank you for your worthless comments. Worthless because your one post of fame will quickly go down in flames by the simplest presentation of facts:

    ____________________________________________________________________________________
    MACON’s tamed response to RESTRUCTURE

    MACON: “…I’ve been intensively working on these topics and their related problems at several levels, professionally and otherwise and in many settings, for over a dozen years now.”

    RESTRUCTURE: “I actually thought you were in your early 20s… I figured that your views on race were naive ‘because you are white’. If what you say is true… you should know better by now and figure it out on your own. I’ve been way too polite, if you’re actually involved in this professionally for over a dozen years…

    Seriously… how can you be working on this professionally and think so unrigorously?”

    “…Maybe there is a more fundamental issue here with your underdeveloped critical thinking skills. I would suggest that you get a basic (101) background in epistemology, but seeing how ineffective academic readings are to your understanding, I don’t know how much this would help you.”

    MACON: “So now I learn that you were spending so much time commenting on this blog because you thought you were holding a neophyte’s hand, walking him through the baby-steps of racism 101. I didn’t realize that. It really changes my sense of your comments, of your presence here. Your condescension is astounding.”

    ————————————————————————————
    MACON’s overly emotional and overly defensive response to NQUEST

    NQUEST: “… Reducing “blackness” down to mere cultural aesthetics [a fist bump or “dap”], simply, does not acknowledge the full humanity of African-Americans as human beings with important thoughts and beliefs.”

    MACON: “… I would think any regular reader of this blog could see, a long, long list of African American intellectuals inform my perspective.”

    NQUEST: “It’s disappointing that the Black intellectuals you’ve been exposed to haven’t penetrated your consciousness on that very basic point.”

    MACON: “Right, I must be an idiot who wasn’t able to finish high school, so hard is it for “basic points” to penetrate my thick skull.”

    ____________________________________________________________________________________

    Notice how the marked difference and, once we consider the “intellectually dishonest vs. dishonest” silliness (below), a pattern emerges: Macon flies off the handle at just the mere presence of certain words — “basic” and “dishonest” — in my posts but, for some reason that you and he haven’t explained… when Restructure explicitly talked about his lack of intellectual rigor and critical thinking skills and suggested that Macon didn’t have “basic” knowledge/understanding…

    Well, Macon never responded like Restructure called him an “idiot” when Restructure’s criticisms were much closer to declaring Macon “a person lacking intelligence or common sense” than mine were. If anything, I argued that Macon lacked certain cultural insights or sensitivities. Restructure, on the other hand, criticized Macon’s intellectual depth, rigor and/or ability.

    So, given the actual nature of our comments, Macon’s emotional blow up in response to what I said speak volumes when compared to the relative tameness of his response to Restructure’s admitted, if not intentional, “condescension” towards him. And being the asshole I am, I’ll lay that out too:

    ____________________________________________________________________________________

    MACON: “…I wonder if Tim Wise, for instance, gets a pass for calling on non-white voices for support that I don’t, because he’s trusted as an authority in a way that’s disallowed by my anonymity.”

    RESTRUCTURE: “…Tim Wise is rigorous. You write anti-intellectual and intellectually dishonest tripe like [you]…”
    (snip)
    “You’re not being intellectually honest with yourself and investigating the topic honestly…”

    NQUEST: “…Restructure is right when he notes how you’re intellectually dishonest.”

    MACON: “nquest, what’s the difference between “dishonest” and “intellectually dishonest”?
    _____________________________________________________________________________________

    Never did Macon ever get all defensive over Restructure characterizing his comments/arguments as “intellectually dishonest.” Never did Macon ever ask Restructure “what’s the difference…?”

    Oh but I guess I was such an asshole to ever point out how Macon’s curious “get used to blackness” thread/thesis didn’t seem to be informed by any of his readings from Black intellectuals… a fact that he never disputed (and couldn’t) when it came to his actual thoughts in that thread. I must be an asshole to point out how Macon tries to seek out whatever pose that gives him an advantage — the fact that he contradicts himself isn’t important.

    Yep! The fact that I’m an asshole… That explains Macon’s asymmetrical responses… The same way your Whiteness, alone, can attest to what Macon does and doesn’t have a problem with even when his own thoughts make a strong case against your ad hoc assertion.

    Comment by nquest2xl — September 27, 2008 @ 11:01 pm | Reply

  61. and also in his thread “Fail to take action”, Macon writes [to Troy Davis]

    To the extent that I’ve been trained against empathizing with you because of our racial differences, and to the extent that I’ve been trained to trust that the justice system works, I’m that much more discouraged by my culture and upbringing from trying to save your life.
    http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/2008/09/fail-to-take-action.html

    Comment by jwbe — September 28, 2008 @ 12:43 am | Reply

  62. gypsy rose,

    Macon D’s blog is a mixed bag. Some of it is obvious stuff about white people that PoC have been complaining about for a long while (but white people don’t listen when we say it), some of it is incorrect stuff about the differences between whites and PoC, and some of it are things about white people that I haven’t thought of before.

    Nevertheless, your logic fails. You make assertions like “You three are clueless!”, “He clearly doesn’t have a problem with Nquest because he’s black–get real!”, and “It’s clear you all have a problem with macon d himself, for whatever reason, rather than with what he writes,” without any evidence or argument. I don’t expect you to actually back up your claims, because you’ve already decided that we’re all idiots who have some kind of unknown beef with Macon D other than about what he writes, even though we know Macon D only as a textual entity and are not connected to him in real life.

    According to you, if it’s something that you don’t fully understand, it must be the other people (us) who are clueless. Have you even considered the possibility that you and Macon D may not understand every nuance about race and racism? Oh wait, you think our gripes are “trivial”. I guess it’s the white people that get to decide which issues are important and which are “trivial”.

    Comment by Restructure! — September 28, 2008 @ 1:49 am | Reply

  63. Restructure, I wrote a couple of different responses before I settled on what I posted above. One of the thoughts I didn’t post dealt with the incredible amount of projection Gypsy performs when s/he ironically talks about the way Macon has “pointed out all sorts of things about racism and white people s/he hadn’t thought about before.” This is ironic because Macon has more or less acknowledged on several occasions how we have pointed out things about racism, etc. that he hadn’t thought about before along with asserting that POC, e.g., tend to know more about racism and White people than White people do.

    Imagine that.

    Now, because of this idea that we need to “get positive”, I guess because Macon’s blog is useful to Whites like Gypsy who benefit from and appreciate Macon “pointing out all sorts of things about racism and white people”, we’re supposed to act like Macon’s demonstrated cluelessness, logical errors and poor reasoning is something that’s… Well, it’s all good because a well behind the curve White person like Gypsy gets something out of it. And, by golly, if Gypsy sees the positives s/he benefits from then why can’t we?

    Oh, wait… Macon can hardly point to things about racism that we don’t know and has refused to focus on Whiteness in something beyond a very superficial treatment.

    Oh and the fact that we’ve spoke favorably about certain posts or topics on Macon’s blog just isn’t remarkable. And how dare we look at Macon’s blog as a “mixed bag” when it’s all good for a well behind the curve White person like Gypsy and others who are beginning to be too numerous to mention. How dare we point out stuff about racism and white people on Macon’s blog. How dare we mention anything beyond what Macon has. And think of the nerve I must have to stand here and challenge anyone to make a serious, sound and logical argument for why I can’t possibly come to the conclusion that Macon has some kind of issue with my ‘blackness’ (I mean, this is the dude who came up with the topic “get used to blackness”) and that’s what accounts for his differential response-reactions to things I’ve said to him compared to things you (Restructure) have said to him.

    It’s not like Macon hasn’t shown such essentialist thinking (to use one of your terms). After all, he wanted to (change the topic and) ask me what I thought about Obama’s “first” (as in first Black presidential nominee) FOR NO OTHER REASON THAN I’M BLACK.

    Comment by nquest2xl — September 28, 2008 @ 2:25 am | Reply

  64. talking with people like this is like casting pearls before the swine.

    There is a self-proclaimed “anti-racist”, who can cite Black intellectuals but doesn’t understand Black intellectuals. They are too intellectual and ‘the brain-rotting properties of white privilege’ (quote Tim Wise) show their dramatic impact on white people.
    There is one guy telling the internet world that now, finally, with Obama whites can “get used to Blackness” while using exactly the stereotypes about Black people like being musicians. I am still waiting that Obama finally sings [/irony]. I think that Macon even doesn’t know what he is saying with that.
    But hey, PoC are clueless when it comes to white supremacy and racism, no matter in which way you are impacted by it. The white voice says so, so it is true. [/irony]
    Such whites only have to SAY that they are anti-racist and then other people are supposed to honor this.
    He also tried to make me believe his lie that he was just about to post about Troy Davis when he admits in his post later that he gives a sh*t about Black people’s lifes.
    Macon and Co don’t need an “unmaking” or “untraining” on a blog which can be read worldwide but they need professional help by a psychotherapist. Their schizophrenia is becoming scary and can’t just be “untrained”.

    This was the Words of Sunday from a white with preternatural experiences.

    Comment by jwbe — September 28, 2008 @ 10:48 am | Reply

  65. My “one post of fame”? “Going down in flames”? Er, whatever.

    jwbe, that shit @64 sounds pretty funny, coming from you, a white person. And that shit at @61 is just nonsensical. and he doesn’t admit that he doesn’t give a shit about black lives–what crap you spout (he obviously does). He said he’s been discouraged by being trained as white to do so. Can’t you see the difference?

    Restructure, offering details to the likes of you three bitter pills is a waste of time. If some of macon’s posts offer things you’ve never thought of before, I don’t see you or your teammates here saying so on his blog (except once when you said something that was, for once, vague, something like “I really like this post!”). You all seem instead to lurk in the bushes, waiting for something to jump on and bitch about. Because of that, you all come across like trolls. It’s really surprising to me that macon even posts any of your comments there anymore.

    So out of what, let’s see . . . over 150 posts, your all down on him because of a few problems from way back when? Again, the OC mania that all three of you display is really . . . weird. To say the least.

    Comment by gypsy rose — September 29, 2008 @ 1:21 am | Reply

  66. Gypsy you “come across like a troll” because I laid out actual posts that complicate what you wanted to claim about what Macon does or doesn’t have a problem with. Clearly you project when you say “offering details to the likes of you three bitter pills is a waste of time.” That’s just what I did with you.

    I posted the relevant content to posts that support my position. Since there is nothing you can say to substantiate your claim, nothing that explains Macon’s differential responses, my point stands. Thank you for wasting my time. I knew you were full of shit and I knew you would show just how full of shit you are in nothing flat.

    You all seem instead to lurk in the bushes, waiting for something to jump on and bitch about.

    Gypsy, the least you can do is keep your bs straight. If your early statement was true and something other than bs then none of us would have to wait. Obviously, your “lurking and waiting” theory implies that we wait for… (wait for it)… something Macon “writes.” Imagine that. See how bs explodes in your face…

    So, make up your mind, rookie. Figure out whether you want to come here and bitch at us for “having a problem with macon d himself” or if we just lurk and wait for Macon to write something that we can jump on. Now, if Macon had his sh*t together then we wouldn’t have those jumping opportunities. Notice you have a built-in, convenient excuse for why you just can’t be bothered with providing actual supportive details… just like Macon.

    You really should have kept your comments to one post… like Macon, the more you open your mouth, as you argue from an intellectually dishonest/subjective position, the more you complicate things for yourself.

    If some of macon’s posts offer things you’ve never thought of before, I don’t see you or your teammates here saying so on his blog

    First, what you don’t see is irrelevant. Obviously you don’t see everything and things you do see are distorted by your personal bias and blindness. I refer you, my dear rookie, to #60. Unless you have something to say in support of your claim in #58, your troll-a-thon here is over.

    BTW… what the hell is OC? Pepper spray? lol

    Comment by nquest2xl — September 29, 2008 @ 2:16 am | Reply

  67. So out of what, let’s see… over 150 posts, your all down on him because of a few problems from way back when?

    Proof positive that you are a ROOKIE. At first, you came here as if there were no problems with Macon’s posts. And this very thread here by topic and content dealt with a recent post of Macon’s and his pattern intellectual dishonesty. He is the one who disingenuously stated, “I get what you’re saying…” when he clearly didn’t.

    This very thread here, the content in the lead post, shows how things I say have everything to do with the stuff Macon writes. Not a single thing I said was “off base” and my logic was flawless. Macon’s, by his own admission, was based on him trying applying his underlying assumption-belief that “all Whites are racist” to the border-crossing Republican phenomenon. Macon’s logic sucked and your very presence here is a testament to just how you think it does.

    What was the first thing you wanted to say to/about me?

    He clearly doesn’t have a problem with Nquest because he’s black–get real!

    Well, not so fast. Let’s use Macon’s logic here.

    All Whites are racist.
    Macon is White.
    Therefore, Macon is racist.

    Seriously, how can you argue with Macon’s logic? lol He clearly has a problem with me because I’m Black because he is a self-described racist. Racism is what racists do, Gypsy. Stop trying to deny it and the strength of Macon’s logic.

    Certainly, since we’re using Macon’s logic, it’s safe to say that we can assume that Macon’s differential responses has to do with his particular brand of racism, for “all Whites are racist” and, apparently, using Macon’s logic again, that idea can be applied to any situation and can reliably tell us things about any random White person, Macon included.

    Now, me, “I understand what Macon is saying” or, more specifically, what he is referring to when he says “all Whites are racist” but I also understand that the concept has its limits the same way the concept that “Blacks can’t be racist” has its contextual and application limits.

    Simply put, Macon has used the “all White are racist” concept haphazardly without recognizing the contextual and application limits of it. Now that’s all about the recent thread referenced here. Your gripe about a “few problems from way back when” describes Macon’s response to me there and, at the same time, shows his hypocrisy.

    Macon determined that I had had “my say” based off of “a few problems from way back when.” Matter of fact, before I posted on that “allow reality to overcome their prejudices” thread, I hadn’t posted on Macon’s blog in more than a month. Talk about being “down” on someone for “a few problems from way back when.”

    Comment by nquest2xl — September 29, 2008 @ 3:56 am | Reply

  68. Now, Gypsy, let’s see if you can do more than just talk shit. This is what Macon said:
    _______________________________________________________________________________________________________

    The following video was posted on YouTube a week or so ago by the Obama Campaign. Their title for the video is “Virginia Republicans for Obama,” and it presents a series of Republican voters, mostly white, who explain how their fears of McCain have pushed them into voting against their usual party affiliation.

    It’s their fears of McCain, you see, that have pushed them into being traitors to their party–any countervailing fears that they might have of electing a black president stay submerged throughout this video.


    _______________________________________________________________________________________________________

    My position, after viewing the video, is Macon is full of shit, for the reasons I listed on his blog. The video does not “explain how their fears of McCain have pushed them into voting against their usual party affiliation.”

    Again, my logic is/was flawless. Macon’s sucked. And, as if misrepresenting what was shown in the video wasn’t bad enough, Macon bastardized the “all Whites are racist” concept just to justify his reckless assumption that at least some of all 5 White Republicans in the video just had to overcome the racial prejudice of not wanting a Black president. That’s not one of Macon’s problem from way back when. That’s a very current/recent problem with a history/pattern to it.

    Now, here’s you’re troll test:

    _______________________________________________________________________________________________________

    That issue is this–if these border-crossing Republicans are really going to vote this new way, one of the things that at least some of them will have to overcome about themselves is their racial prejudice.
    _______________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Tell me whether you agree or disagree with Macon’s statement and why you do or don’t.

    I say that’s but one example out of many where Macon’s logic fails.

    Comment by nquest2xl — September 29, 2008 @ 4:28 am | Reply

  69. Nquest, you sure like to type, don’t you!

    Here’s where my being white and learning about that matters. I know that it’s set racial prejudice inside me. Macon’s claim that I’m probably prejudice in some of my thinking because I’m white is accurate, and so is his claim that some of the people in that video have prejudice feelings in them to overcome. Probably all of them do. Being white in America partly means learning to be prejudice. And we will sometimes act prejudiced unless we overcome that. macon doesn’t have to know the people in that video to know that about at least some of them. Stop patting yourself on the back. Your logic is not flawless. It’s ignorant. How weird it is that you blame macon for claiming to know things about black people, when here you are claiming to know things about white people.

    Okay, have fun now, type another 3000 words in response, when 100 or so would do.

    And @68, you’re only confirming what I wrote before. YOu type thousands of words in comments of OC meticulous atack, and like R, if you do say anything supportive on macon’s blog, you type three or four vague words. You’re only interested in real discussion if you can do it in attack mode.

    Comment by gypsy rose — September 29, 2008 @ 1:08 pm | Reply

  70. jwbe, that shit @64 sounds pretty funny, coming from you, a white person.

    what’s your problem with that?


    If some of macon’s posts offer things you’ve never thought of before, I don’t see you or your teammates here saying so on his blog

    First, we are three different people. I personally make my individual decisions what I will write on Macon’s blog and what not as well as I read his blog from a different perspective and different experience than Restructure and Nquest.
    Second, only because you are the one who can’t understand our point of view that doesn’t mean that we are trolls. Most of all not on our own blog, where you are trolling around.
    If you want to defend Macon because you could learn something from him and his writing, then let me know. Come up with examples which of his posts made you think, what it changed and how this translated into your real life. How did he change your mind?

    Comment by jwbe — September 29, 2008 @ 1:34 pm | Reply

  71. Macon’s claim that I’m probably prejudice in some of my thinking because I’m white is accurate, and so is his claim that some of the people in that video have prejudice feelings in them to overcome. Probably all of them do.

    First, you need to get your shit straight. Macon’s claim wasn’t just that the people in the video have some vague “prejudice feelings” but particular prejudice they have to overcome to vote for Obama.

    Being white in America partly means learning to be prejudice.

    Partly?? What’s the other part? How do we know that any relevant part(s) apply to Macon’s idea that the people in the video had to overcome prejudice regarding voting for a Black presidential candidate?

    Simply, we don’t. Macon logic fails and so does yours.

    And we will sometimes act prejudiced unless we overcome that.

    Sometimes? Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you are. Sometimes doesn’t tell us anything about THIS TIME when it comes to the people in the video. Your logic fails.

    macon doesn’t have to know the people in that video to know that about at least some of them.

    Bullshit. First, the group is self-selected. Second, out of all the prejudices people can possibly have, nothing says that the prejudice against voting for a Black presidential candidate is one any of the people in the video have. There are plenty of prejudice to go around where the prejudice against voting for a Black presidential candidate could have skipped every last one of the people in the video. Macon never considered whether any of the people every voted for a Black person before because he still assumed they were “voting in this new way.”

    How weird it is that you blame macon for claiming to know things about black people, when here you are claiming to know things about white people.

    You have lost your way. I’m not claiming to know anything about white people. That’s my point: that Macon can’t claim with any degree of accuracy what those white people in the video “have to overcome” because he simply knows nothing about them and what racial prejudice they have let alone what prejudices they have to overcome.

    There’s nothing “weird” about what I’ve said because I never made assumptions about those white people in the video. My point is that Macon has no reason or logical basis to make those assumptions, the same way I pointed out how he didn’t have a logical basis for claiming things about Black people. So I’ve been very consistent whether Macon was making wild assumptions about the prejudice Whites he don’t know supposedly have or whether Macon was trying to use POC as a tool to strike against Whites by claiming POC/Blacks pre-judge “new” Whites and view them as people they can’t extend trust to… IN BOTH CASES my position is Macon was making untenable assumptions — assumptions he had no business making, period. But it’s good to know that you’re acknowledging how Macon’s claims about Black people were one of those “problems” you mentioned.

    I’m glad we agree that Macon was wrong to assume that Black people pre-judge Whites the way he said, claiming to have drawn his idea from certain Black writers/thinkers whose ideas didn’t support Macon’s notion.

    Back to the Macon’s claims about Whites, I issued an open challenge for him, you and anybody else… Macon has, more or less, voiced support for Obama, he even referenced a White pro-Obama blogger named ‘A Bitter, Bitter Man’… So let’s hear it: what prejudice did they overcome to vote/support Obama.

    If you support Obama, let’s hear about the prejudice(s) you’ve had to overcome.

    Macon’s idea is what’s weird. Yours is even more weird. Macon is a racist, therefore the way he’s reacted to me has everything to do with me being Black. That’s your logic and Macon’s at work. Nice to know you’ve changed your mind and take back your earlier statement. lol

    I mean, since we know that “Being white in America partly means learning to be prejudice,” we know that Macon has learned how to prejudice/racist and expresses that racism in his differential and, yes, weird responses to me, the Black guy who dared express how I was disappointed in his lack of consciousness or awareness which he got so defensive about and wanted to turn into me questioning his intelligence.

    Maybe I make him feel dumb. I mean, he has told me that I’ve brought up stuff he never thought about. lol

    Comment by Nquest — September 29, 2008 @ 2:05 pm | Reply

  72. Here’s where my being white and learning about that matters. I know that it’s set racial prejudice inside me. Macon’s claim that I’m probably prejudice in some of my thinking because I’m white is accurate, and so is his claim that some of the people in that video have prejudice feelings in them to overcome. Probably all of them do. Being white in America partly means learning to be prejudice.

    What you and Macon are doing is denying the right to other people to be individual souls. Just because it sounds some sort of self-pacifying that all whites are racist, because it lessens the personal responsibility, it doesn’t make it true.
    Throughout history there is enough proof that individual people will react in different ways to the same or similar situations. Already children do this. Even if somebody like Macon tries to make out fun of my personal life experience by calling it ‘preternatural’.
    Just because he didn’t experience something, doesn’t mean that my experience is ‘preternatural’, so, he declares me as something close to crazy or want to imply that I just lie.

    What Macon also is doing is projecting and showing his ignorance about German history and present. He assumes, that I as a white German woman make the same experiences like he as a white American man or all white Americans. He assumes that racism in Germany comes up in the same way like American racism and that the American mainstream-society is the same like the German one. He assumes that all whites have to make the same experiences worldwide without even knowing all the individual life stories of people or knowing history and present, including laws.
    Challenging ones personal racism/Eurocentrism would also include to think about how people like Macon or you interact with people in general and how quick they are to dismiss anything what is different. Trying to dismiss us because your white mindset doesn’t allow anything besides your perspective to be true.

    Comment by jwbe — September 29, 2008 @ 3:21 pm | Reply

  73. gypsy rose,

    What’s OC? Obsessive-compulsive?

    In general, if a piece is well-written and comprehensive, there is nothing more you can add. This is true for any type of writing, and I think you know this. Why do you want us to write lengthy praises for Macon D’s posts, as if we POC (Nquest and I) should be ‘grateful’ that a white man acknowledges that racism and white privilege exist? Are we indebted to Macon D for something that he and everyone should be doing anyway?

    The problems I have with Macon D are not minor or “few”. They are systematic problems, problems with his concepts about race. Your problem and Macon D’s problem is that your understanding of racism is too simple. You think that blatant racism is conservative racism, and subtle racism is what Macon D posts about, and that Macon D has pierced the heart of systemic racism and that his posts are unsurpassed in profoundness and insight. However, you don’t understand how deep and pervasive the problem is, how deep the rabbit hole goes. Check out the Open Letter to “White Anti-Racists”. I bet you think that essay is “weird” as well and that the author has psychological problems too, simply because it is beyond your comprehension and you are used to being told that you are competent.

    Comment by Restructure! — September 30, 2008 @ 1:11 am | Reply

  74. you are used to being told that you are competent.

    Maybe that’s it. When I noted how all the Black intellectuals Macon has been exposed to apparently hadn’t penetrated his consciousness with respects to his problematic and simplistic, stereotype laden treatment in the “get used to blackness” thread, Macon’s *training* where he has been taught that he is competent — and, since he fancies himself as an anti-racist, conscious/sensitive — kicked in and made him respond the way he did acting as if I questioned his intelligence.

    It’s like the little kid who always feels compelled to say, “I knew that,” when an adult explains something he, in fact, didn’t know: the child desperately wants to feel as if s/he is competent and in the right.

    Talk about psychological problems…

    Comment by nquest2xl — September 30, 2008 @ 1:44 am | Reply

  75. @GRose

    And that shit at @61 is just nonsensical. and he doesn’t admit that he doesn’t give a shit about black lives–what crap you spout (he obviously does). He said he’s been discouraged by being trained as white to do so. Can’t you see the difference?

    listen my friend, it is always quite idiotic by people like you or macon to claim that they are experts on whiteness when they still have to struggle with their biases which leads to selective reading and also selective experiences within white society.
    It’s also funny how that works that my ‘white experience’ is dismissed because it doesn’t fit common thoughts or so.
    Being white and ‘anti-racist’ is nothing else than being a traitor. First live that life, you and Macon, and then you can come back and talk about ‘whiteness’. As long as you live ‘whiteness’ yourself you cannot talk about it.
    And when you live such a life you will see it clearly how idiotic some of Macon’s claims are, also his claim of “untraining”. Untraining took place after the Civil Rights Movement, the shift towards “political correctness” and rules which can be learned by white people how to act within white society without being seen as racist. This drove racism underground on a subtle level and Macon exposes his subtle level and makes it accessable to the world wide net. People in “Africa” can read that he once thought that they are not worth living, and still isn’t sure about his sentiments today [“Like I said, I was a jerk back then in some ways that (I hope) I’m not anymore. What I now see about that seventeen-year-old “me” is that he was led by his training into whiteness to see “starving Africans” as less human than himself. So, “just letting them die” seemed to him like an idea worth considering.
    http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/2008/06/lack-empathy-for-non-white-people.html%5D and he still makes it clear that he doesn’t consider Black life worth living. [
    Macon: “To the extent that I’ve been trained against empathizing with you because of our racial differences, and to the extent that I’ve been trained to trust that the justice system works, I’m that much more discouraged by my culture and upbringing from trying to save your life.”]

    It may be “obvious” to you that Macon now “cares” because you want it to see that way, but what he wrote to Troy Davis indicates the opposite.
    You cannot untrain non-empathy. You cannot untrain disrespect. You only can learn the skills of empathy and you can only learn respect. Both is about feelings. Non-feeling – emptiness – cannot be untrained.

    —————
    next. I am sure you read all his threads and also all comments when you are able to call us trolls.
    His post “get used to Blackness”:
    http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/2008/06/get-used-to-blackness.html

    He writes:
    “As I said in yesterday’s post, white people don’t usually spend significant amounts of time with black people, so they tend to perceive them in terms of stereotypes instead of as individuals.
    However, when white people are around black people more often, they tend to get used to them, as people who emerge beyond stereotypes to become individuals.”

    How does the possible election of Obama change this fact? Because Obama could become president white people will spend more time with Black people? How so?
    But his logic is already proved wrong by history itself. White people sometimes spent alot of time ‘with’ Black people via slavery for example. Why then is only ‘isolation’ from Black people considered as a reason for racism?

    also he wrotes:
    “Maybe white people will get more used to blackness, and to markers of it–things like black music, and black gestures, and black words and phrases and names. ”

    I really don’t understand how Obama can be connected with “black music” for example and how whites can get “used to Black music” thanks to Obama, when it was whites throughout history who were “so used” to Black music that they have stolen it. They cannot be so unfamiliar with Black music. So somebody like Macon should think twice before he comes up with statements like this and his undigested suffering from stereotypes he has about Black people.
    But this is what pops up in Macon’s brain when he asks the question: “what about his blackness? How black is he? How black does he act, and how black CAN he act, if he hopes to win the biggest prize on earth?”

    Comment by jwbe — September 30, 2008 @ 1:41 pm | Reply

  76. […] (white) and Nquest (black). A white reader and fan of Macon D’s Stuff White People Do—named gypsy rose—left comments on our blog, accusing us of being “clueless”, of having “a […]

    Pingback by Anti-racism is not human relations programming. « Restructure! — October 6, 2008 @ 12:53 pm | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: