You cannot challenge racism, on this level, by being nice to and reaching out to white supremacists. Their entire ideology revolves around dehumanizing us. It just does. not. work.
You cannot fight fascism by prioritizing the feelings of fascists and letting them think they’re safe around you. You don’t “get them on your side”. Because treating them kindly and respecting them, gives them your silent approval and access to those of you who are way more vulnerable than you are and who cannot afford to feel safe enough to “debate” with these monsters.
Our humanity is not a question or a debate topic, and by giving these people a platform you legitimize their views and help spread them to a larger audience.
Then… How did it work for this guy?
They shot him in the fucking head.
Say that shit again!
They shot him in the fucking head.
They shot him in the fucking head.
They shot him in the fucking head.
They shot him in the fucking head.
The idea that MLK was ‘nice’ to white supremacists is also just historical revisionism @kuurihaunt.
He was sent death threats. The FBI considered him dangerous. People assaulted and murdered many of his followers. White America thought he was too confrontational and not appeasing enough to the sensibilities of whites. He was considered disruptive and an “outside agitator.” He was not a beloved man. He was hated and despised.
His protests came with the risk of being brutalized or killed by police or vigilantes. He decried the white moderate for caring more about order than justice. He refused to condemn riots, ‘the language of the unheard,’ because of how violent America was to Black people. Despite their differences, Malcolm X offered him protection and self-defense. Even though he was committed to nonviolent resistance, which meant breaking the law, disrupting traffic and yes – willingly opening yourself to being brutalized, he was more complicated than you give him credit.
The United States hated him and for his troubles he was killed.
He was not the caricature of nonviolence you think he was. Read a fucking book.
I’m going to need to bring this back up again in February when during peak “re-write black history” time
The Doctor Strange controversy — combined with thepush to cast an Asian American actor as the title character Danny Rand aka Iron Fist — has been buzzing for the last couple months. With the release of the first official trailer for Doctor Strange, Marvel’s next would-be blockbuster movie after Captain America: Civil War, the controversy has reached an all time high. So much so that a Marvel spokesperson gave this statement to Mashable regarding the casting of Tilda Swinton as The Ancient One in Doctor Strange:
“Marvel has a very strong record of diversity in its casting of films and regularly departs from stereotypes and source material to bring its MCU to life. The Ancient One is a title that is not exclusively held by any one character, but rather a moniker passed down through time, and in this particular film the embodiment is Celtic. We are very proud to have the enormously talented Tilda Swinton portray this unique and complex character alongside our richly diverse cast.”
Is this statement true though? Has Marvel Studios really pushed diversity in their movies? Have they increased the visibility of marginalized peoples in their film franchise or television properties? Has Marvel Studios subverted stereotypes? Enough to supposedly excuse recent controversies surrounding Doctor Strange and Iron Fist?
1. white racists (like you “good” whites’ uncles, grandmas, neighbors, and friends) only change their behavior when they are confronted by other whites with more status.
2. when Black people confront the racists attacking us, they just pile on harder because they get a kick out of knowing they’ve gotten to us.
tl;dr – just like Black people have been telling you for decades, it’s up to whites to end racism and you can’t do it by remaining friends with your cousin and grandma who voted Trump because “fuck political correctness”.
Overall, I had four types of bots: High Follower/White; Low Follower/White; High Follower/Black; and Low Follower/Black. My prediction
was that messages from the different types of bots would function
differently. I thought High Follower/White bots would have the largest
effect, while Low Follower/Black bots would have only a minimal effect.
I
expected the white bots to be more effective than the black bots
because all of my subjects were themselves white, and there is evidence
that messages about social norms from the “in-group” are more effective
than messages from the “out-group.” Race does not always define
in-group/out-group status, but because these subjects were engaged in
racist harassment, I thought that this was the most relevant group
identity.
The primary behavior I hoped to change with my
intervention was the subjects’ use of racist slurs. I tracked each
subject’s Twitter use for two months and calculated the change in the
use of a particular racial slur.
Only one of the four types of
bots caused a significant reduction in the subjects’ rate of tweeting
slurs: the white bots with 500 followers. The graph below shows that
this type of bot caused each subject to tweet the slur 0.3 fewer times
per day in the week after being sanctioned.
Roughly 35 percent of subjects provided some personal information on
their profile. The effects of my messages on this subset — that is, non
anonymous Twitter users — were strikingly different. Tweets from white
bots with 500 followers did not cause a significant change in these
users’ behavior, but tweets from black bots with few followers (the type
of bots that I thought would have a minimal effect) actually caused an increase in the use of racist slurs.
For those wondering “what more can I do?”
Here’s an idea for speaking up upside our echo chambers, that sounds like it might do some good.
Based on the findings in the study – and I would be the first to tell you that people behave differently online than off, and anonymity adds another layer to that – I actually think this study supports the personal findings of many white millennials with racist family members: if the racist acquaintance doesn’t consider you higher status than themselves, anything you say to them is ignored or met with worse behavior.
People who regularly say this crap (online, with anonymity) apparently care about status, so now is the time to put your privilege to good work.
So maybe racist grandma or uncle won’t change because you call them out, but your 10 year old cousin who is parroting your uncle might well take your opinion to heart. You’re unlikely to get your boss to stop being such a dick, but your coworkers and peers you may be able to herd into better language, or at least better language in public (which is still a small win). You might not be able to tell the coach that that isn’t okay, but you can get your teammates to not use that word anymore.
My bet would be that this viewpoint on status and marginalized group membership extends to quite a few other categories, too. Those of us in the marginalized group – another ethnic subgroup, or queer, or disabled, chronically ill, neurodivergent, etc – speaking out against bigoted language are likely to be met with unchanged or worse behavior, but someone with status from outside the marginalized group can say hey, that’s not cool, let’s find better words here.
Look to your peers, especially the older you are. We can’t put all of this on millennials when older generations perceive them as so low status. Look to your subordinates and followers, especially the more popular you are, the more people seem to value your opinion. This is the one instance where punching down seems to be the way to actually help.
Racism is not in your intent. Your intent is immaterial in how racist your actions are. This isn’t about you BEING a racist. It’s about you DOING A THING that is racist. Your intent doesn’t change it. Your ignorance of its meaning doesn’t change it. It’s got nothing to do with you as a person and everything to do with the meaning of your action in the context of sociocultural history.
Steel Phoenix Studios 