Society has been improving for millennia. The only reason it won’t continue to improve is if we start taking instruction from woke, opportunistic, virtue signaling morons such as Robin Diangelo.
A great point. I worry that listening to DiAngelo and other crits will substantially roll back the non-trivial progress we've made on race relations in the last 60 years.
"Sinners in the hands of an Angry Broad," is how somebody described her; she's very damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't and hilariously wrong about everything (see this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tjgXQDyqno&t=132s)
What's tragic is that even one person took her books seriously--let alone the apparently hypnotized crowds. Wake up, folks! Let's have another Great Awakening in which everybody at least listens to Coleman Hughes and realizes Martin Luther King got it right when he dreamed of the day when his children would be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin. Bye-bye DiAngelo! Bye-bye, Kendi!
Yes, and humor is so important in combatting woke silliness. Silly it is, but tragic, until--maybe--it can be laughed away ("Can you believe we believed that stuff?")
I don't know who is more cringe worthy or insane, DiAngelo or Ibram X Kendi. Both treat black people like children incapable of managing their lives like any other American citizens. Here's a thought... perhaps, we should ask them (and the BLM organizers) to pool their millions from their race hustling business and send monthly stipends to the most needy for housing, education, and child care.
"Here's a thought... perhaps, we should ask them (and the BLM organizers) to pool their millions from their race hustling business and send monthly stipends to the most needy for housing, education, and child care."--I love this idea.
My number one complaint against woke ideology/culture is it's lack of efficacy in bring any true, practical help to the demographics it claims to be fighting for. This is why I see it as a purely posturing ego feed and on the more extreme edges, a quest for revenge. This helps no one and particularly not real people struggling to make ends meet.
On days when I am more conspiratorially minded, I often mull that this whole thing is just a feint by the elites to keep the poor and middle class busy fighting over various cultural and historical fault lines and also from realizing how the wealthy have stolen the commons and slanted 40 years of policy in their own favor and degraded the quality of life for all Americans.
When they started shipping jobs offshore, the writing was on the wall. We are now living in the aftermath of that move and the whole country is at war with itself and weaker as a result. I am from the rust belt. I had a front row seat.
The woke ideology doesn't bring much in the way of real change. I don't lean towards conspiracies, so I think it comes down to 2 main things.
1) racism/poverty/etc are what Peter T Coleman calls 'attractors'--similar to addiction or psychosis, they're complex problems that resist easy interventions. In Popper's terminology, they're cloudy problems not clock problems. Cloudy problems are hard to fix anyway, but they get harder when you jettison the best methodological tools for effecting real change and more or less just say "we're doing X, and if you disagree you're a racist." I actually get into this more here if you're curious: https://quillette.com/2023/07/09/the-pseudoscience-of-critical-race-theory/
2) The woke tend to be pretty privileged: data shows they're much more likely to have graduated college and earn 6 figures than the average American. That skews their perception of what are real problems (This is why you see NYT articles about microaggressions towards some of the most successful musicians in the world, for instance) and their perception of which solutions could actually work ("why not just defund the police? Who needs them?"). https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/why-are-progressive-movements-so-elitist
Well written, good points, and many good nuances in the comments here. I got a real aversion sensation when attempting to read that book, White Fragility. As a voracious, deeply trained creative musician my whole life, her whole self-righteous "sociological" generalizing really put me off. My mind and soul are minted from Duke Ellington and Ronnie James Dio, Saint John Coltrane , Etta James and everyone in between -- not only is the assumption of conformity among the general population a huge mistake, but I have noticed that creative artists and the innovative imagineers of our society are almost always left out of these Hot Debates. We, after all, are the ones forging and fermenting huge chunks of culture in our chthonic laboratories, although many are dead and gone by the time "society" catches up to them -- still, maybe we should be asked for our views in these matters more often and more seriously.
For instance, read the autobiographies of Etta James, Flea, George Clinton or Buddy Guy you will see their broad-mindedness and holistic view on race/culture overlap a lot, and are at least demi-illuminated. They feel real, not speculative. No offense to people who aren't creative artists: but you all are going to have to give me something substantial to go on before I permit your "ideas" and "philosophies" into my thought-o-sphere -- and if you bring the stench of overgeneralization -- like DiAngelo does -- and also ignore the elephant in the room -- the extractive, divisive essence of domination-based, greed-amplified, corrupt capitalist "markets" --- then, well, I have better sources I can go to! And, one of them is Free Black Thought -- so thanks ;-)
Thank you for these insights. There is much wisdom in the creative arts. Creative arts bring me closer to the soul of things than inflexible dogma. "One of the purposes of great literature, and the need to carry it around with us, is to make sense of the world as it happens."
I never thought I would agree with this kind of thinking , but damn if the author is not making sense. How can you deny that people can repent and be forgiven. From a purely Christian standpoint, this is incompatible with our beliefs.
Two people I follow are Daryl Davis (a black musician who makes a hobby out of befriending KKK members and convincing them to give up their hoods) and Jamie Winship (a Christian who goes into terrorist recruiting camps and convinces their followers to seek Jesus and be peaceful). NO-ONE is beyond redemption.
Woke ideology is a purity quest which lacks redemption/atonement. This appears to be a strength at present because it's rigidity easily punishes dissent - sort of like a fundamentalist version of Xtianity - which, if you think about - it is a version of the religion that has minimized forgiveness. It will, however, lead to it's demise due to this very inflexibility. History tells this tale over and over again.
I think that the explanation in terms of the influence of critical theory (EDIT: I meant to say postmodernism here) is almost certainly wrong. Sure, those philosophical attitudes were often popular/statusful in certain circles that gave birth to DiAnglo but only in the way that Locke, Hayek, Burke and Nozick are popular in conservative circles. People have positive associations with them and they are seen as statusful but no one is actually reaching views by drawing inferences out of this philosophical work. You can't explain why DiAnglo has her views on racr this way any more than you can explain conservative attitudes on immigration by reference to those philosophers. And, what you call crit theory, is so unparseable that only people doing PhDs in the area even read it.
And there is a much much simpler theory. It's just true once you adopt a sufficently expansive understanding of racism. What is a very genuine tend in DiAnglo's intellectual milleu is identifying ever more ways that race and assumptions about race can affect lives and pointing to ways that race can correlate with outcome.
And that's all correct. But the right response is that the goal isn't to make sure people never make any assumptions based on race...but to make sure it's not systematically and hugely bad for certain groups. If we get to the point with race where it's like having a soft voice or southern accent (tiny plusses/minuses) that's huge progress.
But the central rule in DiAnglo's circles is you can't ever say racism isn't that bad. And once you start digging it becomes clear people will never be Spock so they will never be free of all racial assumptions. The error is refusing to say that it's not a big deal below some threshold bc it sounds like making excuses to that community.
Peter: you say"the explanation in terms of the influence of critical theory is almost certainly wrong." I would like to point out that in the introduction of her book "Is Everybody Really Equal, First Edition," she directly states in the introduction that the book is based on "Critical Social Justice," which is different than "mainstream social justice." She further notes that it is based on Critical Theory and even mentions origins in the Frankfurt School. You can find the direct quotes at James Linseys new discourses website: https://newdiscourses.com/2020/02/naming-enemy-critical-social-justice/ . I went the extra miles and read the whole book to verify that James Linsey was not misquoting or quoting out of context. I do not know if this is clearly stated in the second edition of this book.
And I want to be clear, I don't doubt they will say that various postmodern philosophers influenced them deeply. And in some sense that might be true at a subjective level.
But it's analagous to the way some christians can claim to have been deeply influenced by the story of Christ to be prison/criminal punishment abolitionists while some other Christians will say they same story influenced them to appreciate the need to punish wrong behavior.
My point is that what isn't happening is that anyone is taking postmodern philosophical views (to the extent there are any... Foucault just kinda free associated and Derida more resembles a cleaned up version of the notes I wrote on 10 hits of acid than a meaningful claim) and seeing where they lead. They have the views they do for other cultural and emotional reasons and the extremely vague and unrigorus approach used by continental style philosophers (tho that term is also a poor one...ppl who adopt a methodology like that of Derida and Foucalt) is a kind of rorsach test they can project whatever they want onto.
There are hard right near neo-nazi voices that also claim to descend from this philosophical position and wouldn't buy anything DiAnglo is selling. That's the problem you get when you aren't actually making meaningful claims in the first place.
Shit, I said the wrong word...sorry I was tired...I meant postmodern and I wrote the wrong one. Yes, as you are using the word she's influenced by and maybe literally an instance of critical theory. What I was doubting is that the philosophical content of postmodernism has really had much of an affect on that tradition. It's more that there is a certain intellectual tradition that is willing to borrow a few postmodern terms when they feel like it...but I don't think it's really all that influenced by the content of postmodern views.
I agree about D'Angelo but I have a black friend who is from Haiti and escaped to Florida about 30 years ago and he thinks it's a "shit-hole nation". What does that say about him?
Society has been improving for millennia. The only reason it won’t continue to improve is if we start taking instruction from woke, opportunistic, virtue signaling morons such as Robin Diangelo.
A great point. I worry that listening to DiAngelo and other crits will substantially roll back the non-trivial progress we've made on race relations in the last 60 years.
Robin DiAngelo seems always to be channeling Jonathan Edwards, the fiery 18th century preacher: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinners_in_the_Hands_of_an_Angry_God
"Sinners in the hands of an Angry Broad," is how somebody described her; she's very damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't and hilariously wrong about everything (see this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tjgXQDyqno&t=132s)
What's tragic is that even one person took her books seriously--let alone the apparently hypnotized crowds. Wake up, folks! Let's have another Great Awakening in which everybody at least listens to Coleman Hughes and realizes Martin Luther King got it right when he dreamed of the day when his children would be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin. Bye-bye DiAngelo! Bye-bye, Kendi!
Yes!
Also, I love John McWhorter. That clip is amazing.
Yes, and humor is so important in combatting woke silliness. Silly it is, but tragic, until--maybe--it can be laughed away ("Can you believe we believed that stuff?")
I don't know who is more cringe worthy or insane, DiAngelo or Ibram X Kendi. Both treat black people like children incapable of managing their lives like any other American citizens. Here's a thought... perhaps, we should ask them (and the BLM organizers) to pool their millions from their race hustling business and send monthly stipends to the most needy for housing, education, and child care.
100%
"Here's a thought... perhaps, we should ask them (and the BLM organizers) to pool their millions from their race hustling business and send monthly stipends to the most needy for housing, education, and child care."--I love this idea.
💯💯💯
My number one complaint against woke ideology/culture is it's lack of efficacy in bring any true, practical help to the demographics it claims to be fighting for. This is why I see it as a purely posturing ego feed and on the more extreme edges, a quest for revenge. This helps no one and particularly not real people struggling to make ends meet.
On days when I am more conspiratorially minded, I often mull that this whole thing is just a feint by the elites to keep the poor and middle class busy fighting over various cultural and historical fault lines and also from realizing how the wealthy have stolen the commons and slanted 40 years of policy in their own favor and degraded the quality of life for all Americans.
When they started shipping jobs offshore, the writing was on the wall. We are now living in the aftermath of that move and the whole country is at war with itself and weaker as a result. I am from the rust belt. I had a front row seat.
The woke ideology doesn't bring much in the way of real change. I don't lean towards conspiracies, so I think it comes down to 2 main things.
1) racism/poverty/etc are what Peter T Coleman calls 'attractors'--similar to addiction or psychosis, they're complex problems that resist easy interventions. In Popper's terminology, they're cloudy problems not clock problems. Cloudy problems are hard to fix anyway, but they get harder when you jettison the best methodological tools for effecting real change and more or less just say "we're doing X, and if you disagree you're a racist." I actually get into this more here if you're curious: https://quillette.com/2023/07/09/the-pseudoscience-of-critical-race-theory/
2) The woke tend to be pretty privileged: data shows they're much more likely to have graduated college and earn 6 figures than the average American. That skews their perception of what are real problems (This is why you see NYT articles about microaggressions towards some of the most successful musicians in the world, for instance) and their perception of which solutions could actually work ("why not just defund the police? Who needs them?"). https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/why-are-progressive-movements-so-elitist
Yes and yes. Particularly #2. You might have already seen this, but just in case: https://www.robkhenderson.com/p/status-symbols-and-the-struggle-for
DiAngelo is a grifter preying on SJW guilt.
She and her book are nothing but a huge Kafka Trap.
Really, a lot of huge Kafka traps.
https://fee.org/articles/white-fragility-unpacking-the-kafka-traps-of-robin-diangelos-nyt-bestseller
I hereby dub thee:
The Industrialized Racism Industry Complex.
Well written, good points, and many good nuances in the comments here. I got a real aversion sensation when attempting to read that book, White Fragility. As a voracious, deeply trained creative musician my whole life, her whole self-righteous "sociological" generalizing really put me off. My mind and soul are minted from Duke Ellington and Ronnie James Dio, Saint John Coltrane , Etta James and everyone in between -- not only is the assumption of conformity among the general population a huge mistake, but I have noticed that creative artists and the innovative imagineers of our society are almost always left out of these Hot Debates. We, after all, are the ones forging and fermenting huge chunks of culture in our chthonic laboratories, although many are dead and gone by the time "society" catches up to them -- still, maybe we should be asked for our views in these matters more often and more seriously.
For instance, read the autobiographies of Etta James, Flea, George Clinton or Buddy Guy you will see their broad-mindedness and holistic view on race/culture overlap a lot, and are at least demi-illuminated. They feel real, not speculative. No offense to people who aren't creative artists: but you all are going to have to give me something substantial to go on before I permit your "ideas" and "philosophies" into my thought-o-sphere -- and if you bring the stench of overgeneralization -- like DiAngelo does -- and also ignore the elephant in the room -- the extractive, divisive essence of domination-based, greed-amplified, corrupt capitalist "markets" --- then, well, I have better sources I can go to! And, one of them is Free Black Thought -- so thanks ;-)
Thank you for these insights. There is much wisdom in the creative arts. Creative arts bring me closer to the soul of things than inflexible dogma. "One of the purposes of great literature, and the need to carry it around with us, is to make sense of the world as it happens."
I never thought I would agree with this kind of thinking , but damn if the author is not making sense. How can you deny that people can repent and be forgiven. From a purely Christian standpoint, this is incompatible with our beliefs.
Two people I follow are Daryl Davis (a black musician who makes a hobby out of befriending KKK members and convincing them to give up their hoods) and Jamie Winship (a Christian who goes into terrorist recruiting camps and convinces their followers to seek Jesus and be peaceful). NO-ONE is beyond redemption.
Wow, thank you!
"How can you deny that people can repent and be forgiven. From a purely Christian standpoint, this is incompatible with our beliefs."--YES
Woke ideology is a purity quest which lacks redemption/atonement. This appears to be a strength at present because it's rigidity easily punishes dissent - sort of like a fundamentalist version of Xtianity - which, if you think about - it is a version of the religion that has minimized forgiveness. It will, however, lead to it's demise due to this very inflexibility. History tells this tale over and over again.
Never is a very long time.
At least three week longer than forever.
I think that the explanation in terms of the influence of critical theory (EDIT: I meant to say postmodernism here) is almost certainly wrong. Sure, those philosophical attitudes were often popular/statusful in certain circles that gave birth to DiAnglo but only in the way that Locke, Hayek, Burke and Nozick are popular in conservative circles. People have positive associations with them and they are seen as statusful but no one is actually reaching views by drawing inferences out of this philosophical work. You can't explain why DiAnglo has her views on racr this way any more than you can explain conservative attitudes on immigration by reference to those philosophers. And, what you call crit theory, is so unparseable that only people doing PhDs in the area even read it.
And there is a much much simpler theory. It's just true once you adopt a sufficently expansive understanding of racism. What is a very genuine tend in DiAnglo's intellectual milleu is identifying ever more ways that race and assumptions about race can affect lives and pointing to ways that race can correlate with outcome.
And that's all correct. But the right response is that the goal isn't to make sure people never make any assumptions based on race...but to make sure it's not systematically and hugely bad for certain groups. If we get to the point with race where it's like having a soft voice or southern accent (tiny plusses/minuses) that's huge progress.
But the central rule in DiAnglo's circles is you can't ever say racism isn't that bad. And once you start digging it becomes clear people will never be Spock so they will never be free of all racial assumptions. The error is refusing to say that it's not a big deal below some threshold bc it sounds like making excuses to that community.
Peter: you say"the explanation in terms of the influence of critical theory is almost certainly wrong." I would like to point out that in the introduction of her book "Is Everybody Really Equal, First Edition," she directly states in the introduction that the book is based on "Critical Social Justice," which is different than "mainstream social justice." She further notes that it is based on Critical Theory and even mentions origins in the Frankfurt School. You can find the direct quotes at James Linseys new discourses website: https://newdiscourses.com/2020/02/naming-enemy-critical-social-justice/ . I went the extra miles and read the whole book to verify that James Linsey was not misquoting or quoting out of context. I do not know if this is clearly stated in the second edition of this book.
And I want to be clear, I don't doubt they will say that various postmodern philosophers influenced them deeply. And in some sense that might be true at a subjective level.
But it's analagous to the way some christians can claim to have been deeply influenced by the story of Christ to be prison/criminal punishment abolitionists while some other Christians will say they same story influenced them to appreciate the need to punish wrong behavior.
My point is that what isn't happening is that anyone is taking postmodern philosophical views (to the extent there are any... Foucault just kinda free associated and Derida more resembles a cleaned up version of the notes I wrote on 10 hits of acid than a meaningful claim) and seeing where they lead. They have the views they do for other cultural and emotional reasons and the extremely vague and unrigorus approach used by continental style philosophers (tho that term is also a poor one...ppl who adopt a methodology like that of Derida and Foucalt) is a kind of rorsach test they can project whatever they want onto.
There are hard right near neo-nazi voices that also claim to descend from this philosophical position and wouldn't buy anything DiAnglo is selling. That's the problem you get when you aren't actually making meaningful claims in the first place.
Shit, I said the wrong word...sorry I was tired...I meant postmodern and I wrote the wrong one. Yes, as you are using the word she's influenced by and maybe literally an instance of critical theory. What I was doubting is that the philosophical content of postmodernism has really had much of an affect on that tradition. It's more that there is a certain intellectual tradition that is willing to borrow a few postmodern terms when they feel like it...but I don't think it's really all that influenced by the content of postmodern views.
Very interesting points, thanks Peter!
'Statusful'?
What's the question. It's a perfectly good word.
I agree about D'Angelo but I have a black friend who is from Haiti and escaped to Florida about 30 years ago and he thinks it's a "shit-hole nation". What does that say about him?
I will definitely listen! I admire both Hughes and Mounk.