Lately, the war on ‘whiteness’ has been ramping up. And it’s not just in the news media and education. Believe it or not, there are actually a lot of scientific research papers that seek to support the SJW narratives. (It would be revealing to know where their grant funding came from.) I came across this one during a literature review I conducted earlier this year.
Patrick Solomon, John P. Portelli, Beverly-Jean Daniel, and Arlene Campbell, “The discourse of denial: how white teacher candidates construct race, racism and ‘white privilege’”, Race Ethnicity and Education, Vol. 8, No. 2, July 2005, pp. 147–169.
The Abstract for the paper is quoted as follows. [Emphasis mine.]
“In this paper we explore the attitudes, beliefs and ideologies of a group of white preservice teachers who are poised to reproduce and transmit the ‘racial order’ to the next generation of Canadians. These perspectives will be examined within the context of a Canadian national culture that strives for equity, racial diversity and social justice. As teacher educators, our work is informed by the importance of deconstructing whiteness in the academy and society in general. In making whiteness, and more so, white privilege, visible, we hope to interrogate and change the construction of whiteness as an unmarked narrative, invisible category, and white privilege as unearned and unmeritocratic. Therefore, this paper should not be regarded as an attempt to recenter whiteness; rather it is a move to ensure that whiteness is tabled as a viable subject for examination. The failure to examine notions of whiteness facilitates the maintenance of its incorporeal nature thereby reinscribing its dominating power. Or perhaps we could describe our exploration as a strategic focus on whiteness with the aim to challenge and unsettle it, rather than the tendency to use the centering of whiteness as a strategy of denial or protection.”
In other words, they are studying ‘whiteness’ in the hopes of identifying the inconsistencies and weaknesses of the race as an institution in society, such to subject whites to abasement, shame and ridicule.
In the introduction, they explicitly state their goal is to ‘deconstruct’, ‘unsettle’, ‘white privilege’, and I’m sure they shamed a lot of prospective teachers during the interviewing process.
Is this not racist? I feel it is.
What they should really be studying is ‘Majority Privilege’, and whites happen to be a majority in the U.S. In other countries, certain other races have Majority Privilege, and they’re not white. What’s more, there is a lot more racism and discrimination going on in countries where whites are not the majority. So why are they focusing on deconstructing ‘whiteness’ in particular?
If the subject of inquiry were ‘Blacks”, ‘Hispanics”, or any other racial minority in the U.S., and the stated goal was to ‘challenge and unsettle it’, and ‘reinscribe the dominant power’, would that not be denounced as racist? I believe it would. So what we have here is an example of hypocritical double talk about the Leftist narrative.
“1 Judge not, that you be not judged. 2 For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. 3 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.” ~ Matthew 7:1-5 (NKJV)
I’m all for the advancement of other races and ethnic groups, especially those which have been historically disadvantaged. But it’s not a constructive approach to tear down another group in an attempt to do so.
Unless… you want a cultural war on your hands.
Unless… you want to remove whites from being a demographic majority in the U.S.
That seems to be the next thing on the Globalist agenda.
- Reddit/The Red Pill: Reverse discrimination rampant in academia (January 15, 2015)