The Atlantic Article: The Case for Reparations, by Ta-Nehisi Coats

[joshuabgood]

Honest question: How is this integration?

On one hand you seem to be pushing for integration where there is in essence "color blindness" and on the other hand you seem to be pushing for segregation where there is no "color blindness". I thought the whole point in recognizing and accepting white fragility and systemic racism is to get to full integration.

Yes. We need integration that is thoughtfully balanced. Let me give you an example of what isn't ideal. When I was a principal in southern Brooklyn we had a school with 98% students of color along with about 80-90% white teachers when I got there. It is common sense that this isn't healthy or ideal. (And of those 80-90% of white teachers, same an none, me aside, lived in a similar environment as did the students.)

I made the intentional move to hire teachers of color and leaders of color.

Well, I just got back a few minutes ago from our monthly church community picnic where I saw beautiful conversations and interactions taking place between blacks and whites and everyone having a great time, only to be reminded once again that as a redeemed child of God I can't, because of my skin color, see everyone equally.

I'll let this evening's experience and many others like it inform my understanding of how to do human relationships and who I am in Christ over all these secular theories being pushed as the only way to solve racial issues.

And yes, I've become defensive again. Say what you want about White Fragility - I'm going to keep going the way of Christ!

And with that I'm bowing out of these discussions.

God bless you brother.

[RZehr]

Joshbgood, is it okay for a white person in Beijing to be color blind?
- Does it depend on his nativity or how many generations his family has lived there?
- Is his economic status relevant?
- Does it matter if we are talking about year 1400, 1900, 1950, 2000, 2050?

I'm not an expert on Chinese social policy/reality. Why not keep the conversation where we actually live with the reality that we are familiar with? That said, I was told once that in fact racism is alive and well in China by an expert I knew.

I was wondering if what you’ve been saying on the matter of white racism is meant to be objective or not, domestic or foreign. I guess you mean it to not be objective and in the domestic context.

If it is not objective nor international, then there must be a point where the white person moves from white fragility, and institutional, or power racism, to something like equality and to victims of racism.
If this is true, then at what point does this transition happen? And just as importantly, who decides when it has happened?

I’m talking about your proposal that only white people can be racist.

If “only white people can be racist” (under the new definition of racism and in the US context), is not permanent, then who’s to say when it changes? The same people who redefined it this time? Who anointed them the king of racism definitions?

Trying to understand exactly how this is supposed to work, and what the path forward is supposed to look like.

[Robert]

What it does is acknowledges that different cultures are in fact different. There is no such thing as "color blindness." That only exists in white minds from a position of power.

I was really trying to have a fair conversation. You are making wide absolute statements. This bothers me because you are forcing me into a class I do not feel I fit. I know many people who do not fit. Just because I like my brown haired wife does not mean I do not like my blonde haired daughter. Just because someone is different than me does not mean I can not see them as equal and just as valid as myself. Saying I can not is basically saying I am ... "deplorable."

I will respond here and then I am done. JBG, while I respect you as a person, you are so absolute and paint with such a wide brush, that you are doing the opposite of what you want. You have driven me away from this discussion. I am sure we can discuss other things, but this I am done.

I am what would be considered white. I am part of the "white culture." Both terms I personally reject, but would be grouped there by others. "Black" culture is another term I really struggle with, I would call it more a subculture in the US only. I do not think it exists elsewhere. Blacks are about 10% of the population, yet they are ever present in media, movies, and sports. I have no issue with it, just stating it. People of color dominate professional sports. Some teams are well over 50% black. Again, I have no issue with this. Many are extremely wealthy and hold positions of power because of it. I do not see them as a rejected subclass. Maybe 50 years ago, but it has been 50 years of progress. Will some judge others by their skin color? Sure, but it is not as systematic as it used to be. I am sure there are some areas that need to be worked on, but there are some areas that subculture is going backwards and creating some of the issues themselves ie Chicago death rates.

So saying "white" culture is oppressive to this subclass is saying I am since I am part of it. It is grouping me into an attitude and treatment of others that I do not do. It makes me feel like I am being labeled and treating people in ways I do not do. Your words are too absolute. They wipe away the times I have purposely stepped across lines and made friends and reached out to make sure others were treated equally. Those words inflame me and I choose not to respond or discuss this further. If I do, it will make me bitter and I will start to react as you insinuate I do. Because of that. I am done here. Go in peace.

[RZehr]

I find it helpful at times to learn from secular people certain matters, this one included. But on topics that speak to how we should live and treat our fellowman, we have to take what they are saying very carefully.
Because these people’s sense of right and wrong are not rooted in what God calls right and wrong.
So beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
As he have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in Him, rooted and established in the faith, as he have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.

This goes for white people, black people, all people.

There is neither Greek nor Jew, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ’s then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to promise.

[RZehr]

Where there is neither Geek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcism, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ’s then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to promise.
Put on therefore as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, long suffering; forebearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye.
And above all these things put on charity, which is the bond of perfection.

This is not at all what the worldly philosophers say we should do to overcome racism.
I think the Bible has the answers for all people.

[joshuabgood]

What it does is acknowledges that different cultures are in fact different. There is no such thing as "color blindness." That only exists in white minds from a position of power.

I was really trying to have a fair conversation. You are making wide absolute statements. This bothers me because you are forcing me into a class I do not feel I fit. I know many people who do not fit. Just because I like my brown haired wife does not mean I do not like my blonde haired daughter. Just because someone is different than me does not mean I can not see them as equal and just as valid as myself. Saying I can not is basically saying I am ... "deplorable."

I will respond here and then I am done. JBG, while I respect you as a person, you are so absolute and paint with such a wide brush, that you are doing the opposite of what you want. You have driven me away from this discussion. I am sure we can discuss other things, but this I am done.

I am what would be considered white. I am part of the "white culture." Both terms I personally reject, but would be grouped there by others. "Black" culture is another term I really struggle with, I would call it more a subculture in the US only. I do not think it exists elsewhere. Blacks are about 10% of the population, yet they are ever present in media, movies, and sports. I have no issue with it, just stating it. People of color dominate professional sports. Some teams are well over 50% black. Again, I have no issue with this. Many are extremely wealthy and hold positions of power because of it. I do not see them as a rejected subclass. Maybe 50 years ago, but it has been 50 years of progress. Will some judge others by their skin color? Sure, but it is not as systematic as it used to be. I am sure there are some areas that need to be worked on, but there are some areas that subculture is going backwards and creating some of the issues themselves ie Chicago death rates.

So saying "white" culture is oppressive to this subclass is saying I am since I am part of it. It is grouping me into an attitude and treatment of others that I do not do. It makes me feel like I am being labeled and treating people in ways I do not do. Your words are too absolute. They wipe away the times I have purposely stepped across lines and made friends and reached out to make sure others were treated equally. Those words inflame me and I choose not to respond or discuss this further. If I do, it will make me bitter and I will start to react as you insinuate I do. Because of that. I am done here. Go in peace.

Well peace out brother. I just say that the uncomfortableness we feel, being spoken of in generalities, bespeaks the truth that it doesn't happen that much to white men. People of color live the reality of experiencing it regularly, in even more detrimental ways.