Posts Tagged ‘white nationalism’

I’ve been talking about white nationalism and the Crescenta Valley PLE since I first heard about it a few weeks ago. Most of the responses that I have received have been very positive; we are all against racism and would like to make a difference. But what can be done about the PLE here in the Los Angeles area? Many of you have joked that we should let them have their PLE, but lock them up in there—and toss the key.
Of course, that’s not possible. So what is the problem with the PLE in the first place and what can be done to combat it?

I am no political strategist and in complete honesty this is the first time that I have ever tried to undertake a project of this magnitude. I’m just an average woman. I’m still working on finishing up my education and I don’t have all of the answers—which is why I need your help. I just figured that if I sat around and waited for someone else to do something that it would never get done. If I am passionate and sincere in my beliefs then I have to do something—I can’t wait for someone else, someone more experienced or better educated, to take the lead.
So here I am.

I have read the entire “PLE Prospectus” (a book written by a white supremacist regarding how the PLE is supposed to work) and I have read the comments and opinions of white supremacists regarding PLEs so I believe that I have a pretty strong grasp on this subject.
As I read the prospectus I kept looking for a definitive answer to the question of violence. Is violence among the white supremacist residents of the PLE encouraged; is it tolerated? That is a question that the prospectus avoids answering. The author does mention the issue of violence but tries to put a spin on the answer that pretty much leaves the answer open to interpretation.

Here is a quote directly from the book:
“Question: OK, I see, but if a concentrated number of WNs use this same strategy which was employed by the Chinese, Blacks, and Gays to seize a stronghold area and become an open power for the first time in a long time, won’t this local overthrow of the system be met with even greater violence?

Answer: A PLE is to be comprised of two categories of residents, those who keep their feet firmly planted in the system, and a certain percentage of those who describe themselves as militant protesters who will not.
As my personal spin tends to emphasize peaceful negotiation (not to be confused with an overall faith in all PLE supporters), I really don’t have a lot of influence over what militants do.
The Movement Needs More Peace Advocates & Builders.
Those who are participating within the system – and ideally that would be most of us most of the time – will struggle for the community from political offices and the justice system; for it’s our intention to swamp the Republicans, Democrats, and any third party on a LOCAL basis.”
I know that most of you have not read the prospectus so let me break this question and answer down for you real quick. According to the white supremacists other groups of people have created communities within communities that have become places where only they (and their kind) live. Examples of this would be areas like China town, South Central Los Angeles, and Haight- Ashbury. Of course, I probably do not need to explain to my audience how ridiculous that is. Being forced through institutional racism like the practice of ‘red-lining’ and through economic hardship into a particular area or part of town is not the same as creating your own little racial (or sexual orientation) haven. Also, even in the cases where minorities have purposefully gone to a particular area to live (which was somewhat common once upon a time especially for Jewish, Italian, and Asian immigrants) they cannot compare to the idea of the PLE. The area that the PLE is set up in is ALREADY 70% white! It’s already a PLE, as is the entire country! White people are not looking to buy homes in a particular area and being told by the real estate agent that they would be happier in another area that is more their style (i.e. has more white people). White people can and do live everywhere in this country.
Anyway, I digress. I’m preaching to the choir here—I know.

So, paraphrased, the question is: won’t the creation of PLE’s become violent when they are met with resistance?

And (paraphrased) the answer is: yes—but I’m not going to write that down in the book for fear of a future lawsuit.
The author says that there will always be a certain percentage of WNs who will be militant. In other parts of the prospectus he says that he cannot control the actions of the militants and that while he doesn’t support violent behavior that he understands that people are angry and will be violent.

Of course we have seen violent (militant) behavior from white supremacists forever—it’s kind of what they are known for. From the cross burnings and lynching of the past to the mass murder in the Sikh temple and the white supremacist couple who went on a murder spree (targeting black and Jewish people) in the northwest United States last December—we all know that they have a propensity toward violence. I believe that when the average American thinks about white supremacists the picture that comes to mind is that of an uneducated redneck with little to no influence in society. After all, that is pretty much what white supremacists have been for the last 40 years or so.
However, in recent years they have tried to change their public image. Since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the election of President Obama and the start of the great recession many views that were once abhorred by the general public have become more mainstream and white nationalism has gotten greater support from non-militant and educated people. They don’t always call themselves white nationalists. In fact, many do not—and never would. Instead they call themselves “conservative” (please do not think that I am including ALL CONSERVATIVES in this statement—I am only talking about a fragment of conservative people)and they join tea parties and “patriot” movements.

So the first thing that needs to change is how those of us who do not live in a world of racism and fear view those who do. We have to change our paradigm—continuing to think of white supremacists as toothless, uneducated rednecks will only work in their favor, not ours. We must realize that increasingly, there are well-educated upstanding citizens who subscribe to white nationalist views. Take for instance one local here in the Los Angeles area: Kevin MacDonald. Mr. MacDonald is a tenured professor of psychiatry at the University of California Long Beach. Mr. MacDonald writes and edits a blatantly racist blog called “The Occidental Observer.” University administration, staff, and students have been unable to have Mr. MacDonald fired from his position (although thanks to student protests and low enrolment in his classes they have been able to reduce the number of classes he is teaching).
Mr. MacDonald is just one example of how the face of white nationalism is changing. They have lobbyists, politicians, and I am sure, even judges.

This is where we come in. It is difficult, if not impossible to stop militant behavior before it starts. We can’t be there to protect an interracial couple walking down an alley. But we can be there to vote. We can be there to protect our government from being overrun by people who want to take us back to the 1950s. We can limit the scope and reach of those within the PLE which will ultimately discourage new PLE residents and send them looking for some other place to gather. We all know that hatred in large numbers is not a good thing and leads to mob mentality. If the PLE continues to grow, so does the likelihood of violent acts in and around the area.
Such is the focus of Celebrate Diversity Southern California. Educate the residents in and around the PLE – inform them of what is going on in their very own communities and encourage residents who stand with us to make that clear in local elections.
It is imperative that we find out who the local (and national) politicians are who support white supremacist ideas and shut them down in the polls.
My goal right now is weed out any possible supporter of the PLE who may be involved in local politics in the Crescenta Valley area and make sure that such a person is never elected to local (or national) office again.
We can also learn who the supporters of the PLE are in the area who own businesses and we can organize a boycott.
I believe that having a Diversity Fair in the Crescenta Valley area will be an effective way to spread the word to local residents and encourage like-minded residents to support our efforts.

We also need to keep in mind that our country has laws to prevent people from discriminating on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sex, and other factors—however, I worked in apartment leasing in the Phoenix area for years and I have to tell you– laws change nothing. In fact I was fired from two leasing positions because of my refusal to discriminate against perspective residents on the basis of race. Those experiences, more than anything, are the main reasons that I am here today writing this. Seeing racism in action, and not just in words, forced me to see my own white privilege for the first time and it was quite a shock.
When legal action is used to fight back against discriminatory practices by real estate agents, landlords, police, and business owners – those militant types that the author of the prospectus mentioned may become more likely to strike. It is important that we do not underestimate the risk that comes with extremist views. Just because a view holds greater acceptance among the general public, does not mean that it is less likely to become violent. In fact, I believe that history has shown us that public tolerance of hatred leads to greater and greater acts of violence. This is something that was very evident during the struggle for Civil Rights in the 1960s. Having politicians and community leaders on “their side” will likely make them feel justified and above the law.
This is one of the main reasons that we cannot sit on our laurels and wait for someone else to do something about this. We must act now.

Of course, as I said at the start of this post—I have never done this before. I am open to any and all reasonable suggestions and I am still looking for administrative help (and I am grateful to those who are already helping—an official website is in the works, by the way). So please, if you are reading this and you have anything to suggest or add to the conversation please feel free to let me know.

Most of my readers are either my friends or they have been referred by my friends—in that case feel free to send me an email or facebook message. Otherwise, you can leave a comment here on the blog—I will read it. I allow comments from everyone (including non-registered users) but I do read them before I post them, so have patience.

Thank you for reading—please visit Celebrate Diversity Southern California’s facebook page to learn more about how you can help.

White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack
by Peggy McIntosh



Through work to bring materials from women’s studies into the rest of the curriculum, I have often noticed men’s unwillingness to grant that they are overprivileged, even though they may grant that women are disadvantaged. They may say they will work to women’s status, in the society, the university, or the curriculum, but they can’t or won’t support the idea of lessening men’s. Denials that amount to taboos surround the subject of advantages that men gain from women’s disadvantages. These denials protect male privilege from being fully acknowledged, lessened, or ended.

Thinking through unacknowledged male privilege as a phenomenon, I realized that, since hierarchies in our society are interlocking, there is most likely a phenomenon of white privilege that was similarly denied and protected. As a white person, I realized I had been taught about racism as something that puts others at a disadvantage, but had been taught not to see one of its corollary aspects, white privilege, which puts me at an advantage.

I think whites are carefully taught not to recognize white privilege, as males are taught not to recognize male privilege. So I have begun in an untutored way to ask what it is like to have white privilege. I have come to see white privilege as an invisible package of unearned assets that I can count on cashing in each day, but about which I was “meant” to remain oblivious. White privilege is like an invisible weightless knapsack of special provisions, maps, passports, codebooks, visas, clothes, tools and blank checks.

Describing white privilege makes one newly accountable. As we in women’s studies work to reveal male privilege and ask men to give up some of their power, so one who writes about having white privilege must ask, “having described it, what will I do to lessen or end it?”

After I realized the extent to which men work from a base of unacknowledged privilege, I understood that much of their oppressiveness was unconscious. Then I remembered the frequent charges from women of color that white women whom they encounter are oppressive. I began to understand why we are justly seen as oppressive, even when we don’t see ourselves that way. I began to count the ways in which I enjoy unearned skin privilege and have been conditioned into oblivion about its existence.

My schooling gave me no training in seeing myself as an oppressor, as an unfairly advantaged person, or as a participant in a damaged culture. I was taught to see myself as an individual whose moral state depended on her individual moral will. My schooling followed the pattern my colleague Elizabeth Minnich has pointed out: whites are taught to think of their lives as morally neutral, normative, and average, and also ideal, so that when we work to benefit others, this is seen as work that will allow them to be more like us.

I decided to try to work on myself at least by identifying some of the daily effects of white privilege in my life. I have chosen those conditions that I think in my case attach somewhat more to skin-color privilege than to class, religion, ethnic status, or geographic location, though of course all these other factors are intricately intertwined. As far as I can tell, my African American coworkers, friends, and acquaintances with whom I come into daily or frequent contact in this particular time, place and line of work cannot count on most of these conditions.

1. I can, if I wish, arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time.

2. If I should need to move, I can be pretty sure of renting or purchasing housing in an area that I can afford and in which I would want to live.

3. I can be pretty sure that my neighbors in such a location will be neutral or pleasant to me.

4. I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed.

5. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented.

6. When I am told about our national heritage or about civilization, I am shown that people of my color made it what it is.

7. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race.

8. If I want to, I can be pretty sure of finding a publisher for this piece on white privilege.

9. I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the staple foods that fit with my cultural traditions, into a hairdresser’s shop and find someone who can deal with my hair.

10. Whether I use checks, credit cards, or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial reliability.

11. I can arrange to protect my children most of the time from people who might not like them.

12. I can swear, or dress in second-hand clothes or not answer letters without having people attribute these choices to the bad morals, the poverty, or the illiteracy of my race.

13. I can speak in public to a powerful male group without putting my race on trial.

14. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race.

15. I am never asked to speak for all the people of my racial group.

16. I can remain oblivious of the language and customs of persons of color, who constitute the worlds’ majority, without feeling in my culture any penalty for such oblivion.

17. I can criticize our government and talk about how much I fear its policies and behavior without being seen as a cultural outsider.

18. I can be sure that if I ask to talk to “the person in charge” I will be facing a person of my race.

19. If a traffic cop pulls me over, or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure I haven’t been singled out because of my race.

20. I can easily buy posters, postcards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys, and children’s magazines featuring people of my race.

21. I can go home from most meetings or organizations I belong to feeling somewhat tied in rather than isolated, out of place, outnumbered, unheard, held at a distance, or feared.

22. I can take a job with an affirmative action employer without having coworkers on the job suspect that I got it because of race.

23. I can choose public accommodations without fearing that people of my race cannot get in or will be mistreated in the places I have chosen.

24. I can be sure that if I need legal or medical help my race will not work against me.

25. If my day, week, or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether it has racial overtones.

26. I can chose blemish cover or bandages in flesh color that more or less matches my skin.

 Elusive and fugitive

I repeatedly forgot each of the realizations on this list until I wrote it down. For me white privilege has turned out to be an elusive and fugitive subject. The pressure to avoid it is great, for in facing it I must give up the myth of meritocracy. If these things are true, this is not such a free country; ones’ life is not what one makes it; many doors open for certain people through no virtues of their own.

In unpacking this invisible knapsack of white privilege, I have listed conditions of daily experience that I once took for granted. Nor did I think of any of these perquisites as bad for the holder. I now think that we need a more finely differentiated taxonomy of privilege, for some of these varieties are only what one would want for everyone in a just society, and others give license to be ignorant, oblivious, arrogant, and destructive.

I see a pattern running through the matrix of white privilege, a pattern of assumptions that were passed on to me as a white person. There was one main piece of cultural turf; it was my own turn, and I was among those who could control the turf. My skin color was an asset for any move I was educated to want to make. I could think of myself as belonging in major ways and of making social systems work for me. I could freely disparage, fear, neglect, or be oblivious to anything outside of the dominant cultural forms. Being of the main culture, I could also criticize it fairly freely.

In proportion as my racial group was being made confident, comfortable, and oblivious, other groups were likely being made unconfident, uncomfortable, and alienated. Whiteness protected me from many kinds of hostility, distress, and violence, which I was being subtly trained to visit, in turn, upon people of color.

For this reason, the word privilege now seems to me misleading. We usually think of privilege as being a favored state, whether earned or conferred by birth or luck. Yet some of the conditions I have described here work systematically to overempower certain groups. Such privilege simply confers dominance because of one’s race or sex.

Earned strength, unearned power 

I want, then, to distinguish between earned strength and unearned power conferred systematically. Privilege can look like strength when it is in fact permission to escape or to dominate. Power from unearned privilege can look like strength when it is in fact permission to escape or to dominate. But not all of the privileges on my list are inevitably damaging. Some, like the expectation that neighbors will be decent to you, or that your race will not count against you in court, should be the norm in a just society. Others, like the privilege to ignore less powerful people, distort the humanity of the holders as well as the ignored groups.

We might at least start by distinguishing between positive advantages, which we can work to spread, and negative types of advantage, which unless rejected will always reinforce our present hierarchies. For example, the feeling that one belongs within the human circle, as Native Americans say, should not be seen as privilege for a few. Ideally it is an unearned entitlement. At present, since only a few have it, it is an unearned advantage for them. This paper results from a process of coming to see that some of the power that I originally say as attendant on being a human being in the United States consisted in unearned advantage and conferred dominance.

I have met very few men who truly distressed about systemic, unearned male advantage and conferred dominance. And so one question for me and others like me is whether we will be like them, or whether we will get truly distressed, even outraged, about unearned race advantage and conferred dominance, and, if so, what we will do to lessen them. In any case, we need to do more work in identifying how they actually affect our daily lives. Many, perhaps most, of our white students in the United States think that racism doesn’t affect them because they are not people of color; they do not see whiteness as a racial identity. In addition, since race and sex are not the only advantaging systems at work, we need similarly to examine the daily experience of having age advantage, or ethnic advantage, or physical ability, or advantage related to nationality, religion, or sexual orientation.

Difficulties and angers surrounding the task of finding parallels are many. Since racism, sexism, and heterosexism are not the same, the advantages associated with them should not be seen as the same. In addition, it is hard to disentangle aspects of unearned advantage that rest more on social class, economic class, race, religion, sex, and ethnic identity than on other factors. Still, all of the oppressions are interlocking, as the members of the Combahee River Collective pointed out in their “Black Feminist Statement of 1977”.

One factor seems clear about all of the interlocking oppressions. They take both active forms, which we can see, and embedded forms, which as a member of the dominant groups one is taught not to see. In my class and place, I did not see myself as a racist because I was taught to recognize racism only in individual acts of meanness by members of my group, never in invisible systems conferring unsought racial dominance on my group from birth.

Disapproving of the system won’t be enough to change them. I was taught to think that racism could end if white individuals changed their attitude. But a “white” skin in the United States opens many doors for whites whether or not we approve of the way dominance has been conferred on us. Individual acts can palliate but cannot end, these problems.

To redesign social systems we need first to acknowledge their colossal unseen dimensions. The silences and denials surrounding privilege are the key political tool here. They keep the thinking about equality or equity incomplete, protecting unearned advantage and conferred dominance by making these subject taboo. Most talk by whites about equal opportunity seems to me now to be about equal opportunity to try to get into a position of dominance while denying that systems of dominance exist.

It seems to me that obliviousness about white advantage, like obliviousness about male advantage, is kept strongly inculturated in the United States so as to maintain the myth of meritocracy, the myth that democratic choice is equally available to all. Keeping most people unaware that freedom of confident action is there for just a small number of people props up those in power and serves to keep power in the hands of the same groups that have most of it already.

Although systemic change takes many decades, there are pressing questions for me and, I imagine, for some others like me if we raise our daily consciousness on the perquisites of being light-skinned. What will we do with such knowledge? As we know from watching men, it is an open question whether we will choose to use unearned advantage to weaken hidden system of advantage, and whether we will use any of our arbitrarily awarded power to try to reconstruct power systems on a broader base.
Peggy McIntosh is associate director of the Wellesley Collage Center for Research on Women. This essay is excerpted from Working Paper 189. White Privilege and Male Privilege: A Personal Account of Coming To See Correspondences through Work in Women’s Studies (1988), by Peggy McIntosh; available for $4.00 from the Wellesley College Center for Research on Women, Wellesley MA 02181 The working paper contains a longer list of privileges.

This excerpted essay is reprinted from the Winter 1990 issue of Independent School.

I call BS.!
By Barbara Rae Young

Have you heard the white nationalist’s official mantra?

I have. And I’m writing this today to tell you why it’s a giant load of BS.

If you’ve spent any time reading comments on the internet (especially on youtube) you may have run across the mantra, or bits of it, in comments sections all over the internet.
One of the main recruitment strategies of white nationalists is to flood (or swarm as they call it) the internet with this mantra in order to plant a seed of confusion in the minds of white people and eventually bring them to the cause of white nationalism.

Here is the official mantra: “Africa for the Africans, Asia for the Asians, but white countries for everybody? Anti-racist is a code-word for anti-white.”

And here is why this entire argument is nothing but crap.

1. I don’t think that whoever penned this so-called mantra really spent a lot of time doing their research first. In fact, I think they spent NO time at all researching the facts behind their claims. Because I just spent a couple of hours researching this, and—I’ll tell you what, it’s just not true.

“Africa for the Africans”: I looked at three countries in Africa—South Africa, Kenya, and Uganda.
South Africa has a very diverse population, including many black Africans, Arabs, and white Europeans. White Europeans- -most coming from the UK have been one of the largest immigrant groups to come INTO South Africa over the last few years. In fact since 2003 the number of white British migrants coming to South Africa has risen by more than 50%!

Kenya’s population isn’t quite as diverse although a significant number of white people of European ancestry still call Kenya home. White Europeans have a great deal of political clout in Kenya—especially among the Kenyan elite.

Uganda is the most homogenous of the three African countries I looked at. And still, there are a significant number of non- black Africans, Arabs, and Asians in Uganda.

“Asia for the Asians:” what you find in Asia is a completely different way of thinking about race than you have in the western world. The political climate of the area also plays a huge roll in the diversity of each country. Communist China, for instance, has many different racial groups—but most of them are Chinese in origin—they are simply from different areas.
Japan, on the other hand is politically more progressive than China and race really isn’t even an issue there as far as the government is concerned.While some 98.5% of the population of Japan is listed as “Japanese” that number is racially misleading. The Japanese census makes no distinction between races. The census only asks people their nationality. Therefore, if you were born in another country but have become a Japanese citizen—you are considered Japanese regardless of the color of your skin … How refreshing.

Mexico is surprisingly diverse. There are people from all over the world living in Mexico. There are white and black people from all around the globe and there are also a wide-range of Mexican nationals. “Mestizos,” the largest of all racial groups in Mexico, are Mexicans who do not identify as belonging to any one group. They are usually a mix of indigenous people and Europeans. It is important to mention that the term “Mestizo” is not being used as widely within Mexico as it once was—in fact it has been taken off of the census. The word “Mestizo” has somewhat pejorative connotations and most of the Mexican citizens who would be defined as mestizos in the sociological literature would probably self-identify primarily as Mexicans.

Most Arab countries are still quite homogenous.

So—what does all of this demographic information tell us?
For one it tells us that there seems to be two main factors to racial demographics in any given country. 1. Politics, and
2. Wealth

Democratic and progressive countries, regardless of where they are in the world, have diverse populations, and wealthy countries are the most diverse of all. As developing countries gain wealth—they will also gain immigrants, from everywhere in the world.

Countries where the citizens have fewer freedoms have a less diverse population.

White nationalists often scoff at the idea that the United States is a “melting pot.” But they seem to forget, or ignore that this country, from its inception, has been a safe haven for the lost people of the world. Many forget the words of Emma Lazarus, which are inscribed on the Statue of Liberty: “give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”

Oh. And can I just mention that, as far as the U.S. goes… We (white Europeans) INVADED SOMEONE ELSE’S LAND! It was not ours to begin with! Mexicans have a much more significant claim to it than any “European American,” because this land belonged to the indigenous people who were ALREADY here! People who were killed and whose culture was destroyed.
Of course, white nationalists don’t agree with that. They think that white people were here first.
And that is just too much nonsense to even humor.

2. Finally, “anti-racist is a code word for anti-white:” that’s just pure nonsense. Those groups of people who are actually anti-white, groups like the black separatists (who are just as bad as the white separatists), make no bones about being anti-white. They don’t feel the need to hide behind rhetoric. The rest of us aren’t anti-white, or anti-black, or anti-brown, or anti-anybody. That’s the point. We are pro-everybody. Being anti-racist does not mean that you are expected to marry and procreate with someone of another race; it means that you are expected to not look down on those who do.

So next time you see the mantra, or bits of the mantra, posted in the comments section of a news article or a youtube video—please take a minute to tell them that you don’t buy it. Feel free to post a link back to this article, if you’d like.

Diversity is born of freedom. We are a free and diverse nation, and we are proud of it.