Word to the Wise: Unpacking the White Privilege of Tim Wise
“My friends, I have come to tell you something about slavery – what I know of it, as I have felt it. When I came North, I was astonished to find that the abolitionists knew so much about it, that they were acquainted with its effects as well as if they had lived in its midst. But though they can give you its history – though they can depict its horrors, they cannot speak as I can from experience …”
Frederick Douglass, 1841
In the past decade or so, we have witnessed the rise of critical race studies, even something called Whiteness Studies. With the rise of Whiteness Studies on college campuses across the country has come the resurgence of whites as so-called experts on all matters pertaining to race. Among the most popular of them is the anti-racist speaker Tim Wise, who has become a regular presence on the college lecture circuit as well as in the media in the past few years. He has even been deemed the leader of the anti-racist movement by some of these very media outlets.
As Black liberationist, abolitionist, anti-racist and social justice activists, we would be wise to use this moment to ask some critical questions of ourselves and the state of the movement for racial justice in the U.S. We are thus compelled to critically engage Tim Wise and what his apparent popularity represents both in symbol and substance. In so doing, we confront the two fundamental issues in this work of eradicating racism: internalized oppression and white privilege.
Wise’s popularity among liberal whites is not that surprising to me. What is surprising is the level of popularity he’s gained within segments of the Black community. Some have even gone as far as to view him as some kind of Great White Hope. What is most curious about this apparent Black fascination with Wise is that when I hear certain Black people and other people of color refer to him, they talk about him in the same way they would talk about the first time they saw a white guy dance, rap or dunk a basketball. By internalizing the stereotypes of Blackness as defined by the white racist imagination, we have, in turn, embraced a codified image of Blackness. Thus, when we see white people cross the race-tracks and engage in behavior that has been deemed “Black,” we react with a kind of cultural “shock and awe.” In the case of Wise it is a little more complicated than that. Wise isn’t being acknowledged for his ability to sing or dance “like a Black person” but for his willingness to cross the tracks of race discourse and out whiteness – the ultimate racial taboo.
There is this sense among some of us that because he speaks against racism, he must be all right. And as such, he has garnered the coveted “ghetto pass,” a symbolic gesture given to those whites considered “down” with Black people. But we have seen what happens when whites feel they are “in like Flynn” with our people; they get right racist and condescending (remember Bill Clinton during the 2008 Presidential campaign?). In effect, they become even whiter. Therefore, let us insure that Wise’s “pass” doesn’t enable him to bypass critical inquiry that could benefit the movement and, maybe, even Wise himself.
What this fascination fails to take into consideration is the fact that white people have been speaking out against racial oppression since the first slave ships docked in the colony of Virginia. We should be past such elementary appreciation. When we fail to hold whites who proclaim an anti-racist stance to a higher standard, all we end up with are whites talking about how bad racism is. Mouthing off against racism is not going to end racism, no matter how loud and boisterous the bombast becomes. We have to get beyond this almost worship-like praise for what, in the end, are but baby steps in the long march against white supremacy.
Don’t get me wrong, I do not have a problem with white people speaking out against racism or Black people acknowledging white people working against racism. But when that acknowledgment precludes or is prioritized over and beyond our acknowledgment of ourselves, then we have a problem. That problem is called internalized oppression, a symptom of the very system we are working to defeat. Therefore, Black people giving uncritical praise or consideration to our white allies actually works toward our continued oppression. Remember how some of our people who were blinded by whiteness used to say: “The white man’s ice is colder”? Well, it seems these days that that same internalized oppression is at play in some who believe that the white man’s anti-racist analysis is more accurate than our own.
When I ask such persons what makes Wise’s commentaries so unique or revolutionary, they become quiet. For in truth, there is nothing new in Wise’s analysis. If anything, it is an analysis born of the blood struggle for Black liberation and racial justice throughout American history. Our ancestors may not have used terms like “white privilege.” Instead, they just called it what it was and is: white supremacy. (Imagine a white anti-racist saying, “I’m going to use my white supremacy to help people of color.”) Nonetheless, white privilege has become the watch-word of the movement. Yet, for the most part, it has been used as a means for white anti-racists to point the finger at “those” whites or navel gaze and wallow in a guilt that doesn’t produce results. Overall, it has the tendency to takes us away from addressing the real issue head on – whiteness itself and the ideology of white supremacy that gives whiteness whatever power and meaning it currently holds.
In the case of Tim Wise and other leading white anti-racists, we can accurately pin-point the state of the anti-racist movement by unpacking the white privileges they, themselves, hold and benefit from.
The first of these white privileges is one I have already addressed: The ability to paraphrase and/or otherwise exploit the analysis of Black liberation struggle and have it received by others as though it were their own. In the past decade or so, there has grown a cottage industry of books written by white people talking about their whiteness and their awareness of racism. When these white authors fail to acknowledge the debt they owe to the blood struggle of people of color in this country as they often do, they practice a form of racism that keeps that history erased from the consciousness of this country. This enables the white establishment to bypass Black people and hold up their own as authorities on the race question.
Another white privilege Tim Wise and other white anti-racists carry is the ability to emotionally express their views about racism without having that expression dismissed as “angry” or “too emotional”. When Wise speaks passionately and fervently about racism, his expression is understood as a sign of a person standing up for what he believes. As such, it is championed even when he is derisive or sardonic in his remarks. When we, people of color activists, speak passionately about racism, we are maligned and ridiculed as being angry, militant, even hateful and dangerous. If we wish to be heard (let alone understood), we are expected to speak calmly and politely about our experience and analysis regarding racism. Otherwise we are demonized. White moral indignation is justified. Black moral indignation is vilified. This has long been the case.
The third white privilege that Tim Wise and other so-called white anti-racists enjoy is the privilege of being honored for their anti-racist work as their Black activist counterparts and other activists of color are denounced and derided. Case in point: Several years back I spoke at a school in Massachusetts for their annual Dr. King Day commemoration. As I spoke about King’s legacy and the ongoing struggle for racial justice, I was met with outright hostility from the students gathered in the auditorium. The following year I would be contacted by an Arab faculty member at the school. She would inform me that for that year’s King Day event, the school decided to invite Tim Wise to address the student body. She went on to inform me that Wise was received with profound admiration by the very same students that heckled me the year before. Isolated incident? Chance circumstance? To my knowledge, similar events like this have at occurred on two more occasions since.
On one of the other occasions, I was contacted by a Black student organization that had to petition a reluctant administration to gain the necessary approval to invite me to speak. Just one semester following my presentation they would inform me that Tim Wise had just spoken at their school, where he received the red carpet of administrative respect and welcome. When this occurred at a third school, a Vietnamese student emailed me and rhetorically but sincerely asked, “Isn’t this what Tim Wise is supposed to be against?”. In all three cases, persons and groups that reached out to me expressed a level of frustration at witnessing the hypocrisy of the institutions they were working at or attending.
Let me make it clear here that I am not airing this to complain about my personal experiences. I do it because I know that I am not the only one who is experiencing this kind of racism. I am also addressing it here because in one of the cases I’ve mentioned, it actually worked to undermine the efforts of students who had organized to hold their university accountable. Over a four-year period, I worked diligently with these students and their allies. During this time of dedicated training, they all became adept anti-racist activists. They were a small but formidable band of students ready and prepared to take the university to task on its stated and unstated policies toward students, faculty and staff of color. The very year they planned to confront the university administration with their agenda, word got back to some key university officials. And in true duck and cover fashion, the administration brought in Wise with much publicity to avoid addressing the students and their demands. The entire campus turned out and the university was able to present itself as champions of diversity. Thus, when the students brought forward their demands, the university was able to side-step them by claiming that they were on top of it given their experience with Wise. Of course they were lying, but the students no longer had leverage as the campus community felt that they had done enough by bringing Tim Wise to speak.
This is just one example of the ways that white anti-racists who are not in accountable relationships with activists of color can be used to work against the best interests of people of color, whether knowingly or not.
One of the student leaders of this effort would later ask me if I’d be willing to debate Wise. I informed her that I would welcome the opportunity to engage in a constructive conversation with Wise on the state, purpose and direction of anti-racist struggle. The problem with that is that Wise only debates individuals with views more conservative than his own. This way he can continue to promote himself as the most radical anti-racist voice on the scene when he is not – not even among whites. [Noel Ignatiev has called for the outright abolition of whiteness in the face of other whites’ calls for what essentially amount to a kinder, gentler whiteness. By so doing, Ignatiev is taking up the challenge to expose whiteness as a form of status within the capitalist system rather than as a biological or cultural reality, which is how it continues to get passed off as – even within certain so-called anti-racist circles. Such an assertion takes it cue from an observation James Baldwin made many moons ago: “As long as you think you’re white, there’s no hope for you.” If such an end were the aim of the movement, so-called white anti-racists could no longer go around claiming to want to use their white privilege for the good of the movement. Such a claim would be recognized as the nonsense it is.] Like Eminem in “8 Mile” taking on the Black rapper from the suburbs in his effort to establish his street cred and carry the “Blacker than thou” mantle, it seems that Wise takes on conservative intellectuals of color like Dinesh D’Sousa and Ward Connerly to prove he’s “Blacker” (more radical) than they are. That might impress some of Wise’s liberal Black bourgeois friends, but such side-show debates do nothing to bring us any closer to eradicating institutional racism.
It seems that Wise and other anti-racist whites have become higher education’s answer to people of color activists like me. As long as the dissidents are white, these schools are willing to practice the “tolerance” they claim to uphold as beacons of the liberal arts. It has even gotten to the point that nowadays it is not at all strange to see a white person giving the keynote speech for Black History Month. I honestly don’t think that is what Dr. Carter G. Woodson had in mind when he instituted the week-long celebration that would become Black History Month back in 1926. It is bad enough that February, the shortest calendar month of the year, is what Amiri Baraka calls “Black artist employment month.” Now we can’t even count on that. Like our people who are removed from the neighborhoods they grew up in as affluent whites gentrify urban communities, we find ourselves being removed from the one space our ancestors fought for on the calendar. And why is it so difficult for some of us to not see this racial switch as an attack on Black self-determination in much the same way as the current effort to dismiss Black History Month all together?
What can be deduced from these experiences is that there is clear benefit for those with white skin even in the context of anti-racist discourse. There is a distinct inequality in how we are perceived and treated by the white establishment. Despite Wise’s opposition to white supremacy and white privilege, he is a clear beneficiary of both. This is largely due to the fact that, evidently, he is not perceived as a threat to the establishment.
What does this say about Wise? What does this say about the state of the movement? What does this say about the state of racism in our society? White institutions can tolerate anti-racist discourse as long as it is spoken by somebody who looks like them. In fact, such staged discourse becomes a prime opportunity for such schools to present themselves as champions of multiculturalism and diversity even as they continue to enact policies and initiate professional and educational practices that discriminate against students, faculty and staff of color.
By definition, white privilege is not earned. Wise doesn’t have to do anything to gain access to the benefits assigned to the social construct of racialized whiteness. Even his apparent efforts to expose it have not caused the white establishment to banish him or treat him like a person of color. Given that Wise isn’t saying anything new or revolutionary in regards to how to eradicate racism, what accounts for his popularity and celebrity status and the fact that his calendar is filled with engagements for the next few years? His whiteness! The very thing he speaks against. Might this be the ultimate white privilege?
Now I am sure that there are some people reading this who might be saying, “Of course he can’t escape his privilege, we live in a racist society!” No argument here. All the more reason for him and those like him to be held accountable.
When grassroots Black activists speak honestly about racism at colleges across this country, we are not met with open arms by administrators and faculty. And most certainly our calendars are not full for the rest of the year let alone for the next three to five. When we speak, we are often met by the deaf ear of white denial. When Tim Wise speaks, he gets applause, standing ovations, awards and proclamations. The fact that schools can’t “hear” us when I and other people of color speak but will search out and roll out the red carpet for Wise is a statement to a kind of racism that doesn’t get discussed much – if at all – in our work. Despite all of the white anti-racist presentations given over the years at colleges and universities across the country, institutional racism at these schools remains intact. All the while, activists of color continue to be muffled and marginalized. Even in the ghetto of race discourse we remain tenants and never owners of an analysis that is ours to begin with.
One way that whites can be accountable is to stop being enablers to white supremacy by supplanting the voice of people of color with their own. We do not need white people speaking for people of color. Such talk is crass paternalism. My words do not need to be placed through a white filter in order for them to be understandable. Besides, there are some things that get lost in “translation.” If there is work for whites to do on this issue, then let it be work that addresses this deaf ear of white denial. This is a question of power. Whites that do not listen to people of color do not have a “hearing problem.” They fail to hear and to listen because they can. Those that promote the claim that white people speaking for people of color is a positive only coddle such whites in the comfort of their conformity to a way of life that denies, not just the voices of people of color, but our lives as well.
All of the aforementioned privileges taken together provide Wise a pretty formidable platform from which to attract the support of those of us who seek an end to racism. By supporting him, such persons are made to feel as if they are fighting racism. In this vein, he is able to make use of such support from those who will rally to his rescue when he calls on them to defend him with a bevy of “like” button clicks or a hail of 5-star reviews when he has occasioned a derisive remark made by the usual suspect – an avowed white supremacist. Really? Has this become the epitome of anti-racist activism? This would be laughable if we weren’t discussing something as deadly serious as racism. Such “cyber activism” is just another form of white diversion from engaging in actual activist work.
Must I remind us that people of color live our lives under daily assault? Clicking a “like” button is not going to stop the hail of gun-fire that snuffs out the lives of the Oscar Grants and Aiyana Joneses of our communities. Oscar Grant and Aiyana Jones were not militant activists. Jones was just seven years old for God’s sake! They were Black and, according to this system, that was sufficient. Until the movement confronts that realityhead on rather than cry about some nasty review of their book, I have little regard for their “anti-racist” activism. Such attacks from white supremacists should be expected in this work. If I had a dollar for every piece of hate mail I’ve received …. My point is that it comes with the territory. To make noise about it is just self-serving. And that is putting it mildly.
This imbalanced relationship between people of color activists and white anti-racists reinforces the power dynamic of white supremacy even within the movement. White anti-racists have been able to evade accountability on this front due to the fact that they wield power and influence over and beyond people of color activists by virtue of their white-skinned privilege. This is a fact that has dogged our movement since the days of Abolition. And to those who question my right to question Tim Wise or suggest that Wise is beyond critique, I say as Henry Highland Garnet said to the white abolitionists of his day, “If it has come to this, that I must think and act as you do, because you are an abolitionist, or be exterminated by your thunder, then I do not hesitate to say that your abolitionism is abject slavery.”
The fact is that someone like a William Lloyd Garrison, who did far more than Wise with far less than Wise, was critiqued way more harshly than anything I have penned here by his Black contemporaries. Maria Stewart, Frederick Douglass and others within the Black Abolitionist Movement always maintained an analysis that was independent of white abolitionists. Theirs was an analysis based on the life-and-death reality they faced on the daily. And they were quick to check the blurry vision of those who sat upon the lofty heights of their privileged status as whites no matter how well-meaning they may have been. To relinquish that right and responsibility now would be a disservice to my forebears and the example they have left for all of us.
This is a problem that our movement must address. This movement cannot challenge the institutional racism as it is currently positioned or personified. Our people’s movement for liberation and self-determination has resulted in the development of a community of whites who have amassed a working knowledge of the system of white supremacy. Many of them claim to possess a conscious commitment to eradicate racism. Yet there is a lack of critical direction or an expressed unwillingness on their part to take the direction from the lived reality of people of color movements for racial justice.
In order to resolve this, we must first question ourselves and address our failure to anticipate this trend and prepare ourselves for it. Instead of providing an agenda for white anti-racists to engage with us in authentic solidarity, many of us now just get giddy and tickled by the spectacle of whites talking about racism. Our lack of awareness of the lessons learned from past alliances with whites and our apparent unwillingness and/or inability to hold those whites who claim a commitment to anti-racist struggle accountable has resulted in a movement that is largely led by whites.
Black liberation theologian James Cone’s twenty-five year old observation remains true: “Wherever Black people have entered into a mutual relation with white people, with rare exceptions, the relationship has always worked to the detriment of our struggle. From the abolitionist movement of the nineteenth century to the recent civil rights struggle of the 1950s and 60s, whites demonstrated that they cannot follow but must always lead.”
I do not expect or anticipate Wise of his own volition to critically assess himself in the context of Black self-determination and people of color solidarity. Further, I don’t expect Wise to move beyond his lucrative lecture tours to organize a movement of whites that actually confronts systemic racism. After all these years that he has been on the scene, if he were to start such an effort, he would have done so by now. Even so, the fact remains that in the realm of anti-racist struggle, thousands-of-dollars engagements do not constitute activism. They might be materially enriching for him on a personal level, but for the cause he claims to represent, such talk is cheap. And please, lest I find myself inundated with emails from those who idolize Wise, let me state for the record that nothing I have written herein will have any detrimental impact on his ability to make a living. His bank account will not take a dive on the account of my critique. One thing is for certain, he will never have to contend with the daily concerns of activists of color who are attacked and marginalized for speaking our truths and challenging convention in society and within our own ranks.
I’d say it is high time to up the anti-racist ante. In the end, what actually is a white anti-racist? Who defines such? And if that definition comes from a white person, how is that anti-racist? These questions may not be convenient, but us closing our eyes to them doesn’t make the issues they speak to go away. And I am clear that I am not the only one asking such questions. There is an ever-widening circle of committed people of color and white activists that see the hypocrisies and inconsistencies that exist within this work. They, too, are trying, in their own responsible way, to address them. It is time that we bring these questions to the surface, not to denigrate each other, but to strengthen our will and resolve in the spirit of fulfilling our purpose as a movement: the eradication of systemic racism.
Until the movement as a whole is able to adequately address these critical concerns, and people of color are no longer being dismissed and having our truths overlooked or otherwise dissed by those that claim to be our allies, here is a word to the wise: Rather than talk about the white privilege of others, Wise would be wise to simply discuss his own. Not in some general, “I’m a white guy” way either, but in a way that addresses his particular privileges as a white guy talking about racism such as the ones outlined in this essay. There would be no more compelling argument.
Ewuare Xola Osayande is a political activist, poet and author of several books including Misogyny and the Emcee: Sex, Race and Hip Hop. He is co-founder and director of POWER (People Organized Working to Eradicate Racism), a liberatory learning initiative that educates and empowers persons and organizations interested in and involved in anti-racist social justice movements. He is also host and producer of “The Resistance with Ewuare Osayande,” an online radio show that features news, music and commentary that champions the causes and concerns of people of color across the globe. Originally posted at Burning All Illusions.
Similar Posts:
- What is White Anti-Racism?: The Win-Win Privilege and the Indulgence of White Guilt
- POC Anti-Racist Organizing and Burnout
- Debate: Are Racism and Sexism Universal and Not Gender-Dependent or Race-Dependent?
- White Racism, White Supremacy, White Privilege and the Social Construction of Race
- Poster Campaign: “United for Justice, Not Divided by Racism”
Another great post that speaks to my very existence and struggles as a person of color in America. Thank you for taking the time to put this together, Ewuare!
I always get deemed as “angry” when I talk about how whites are gentrifying my community, despite how passionately, or calmly I speak about the issues. They personalize it to a point they feel as they they are being attacked. Many of them, as you point out, that ” claim to possess a conscious commitment to eradicate racism. Yet there is a lack of critical direction or an expressed unwillingness on their part to take the direction from the lived reality of people of color movements for racial justice.”
This year, I had a young white couple do their internship with the grassroots organization I run. When I called them out on overstepping their work by taking on a responsibility of my own, one that I did not give them to do, they ran to their parents and professor, stating that the work environment they were in wan now “hostile.” Calling them on their privilege, and reminding them that they were spending their time in an organization run by people of color to serve people of color was a shocker to them. In their minds, I am a “hostile Black man with issues.” Yet, I was honoring my responsibility to maintain leadership in serving for my community, pointing out this responsibility to white “allies” I feel is a part of this.
At any rate, thank you, again for bringing me home with this article. We have much work to do!
Jason
This analysis is dead on. HOWEVER, I have seen Tim Wise speak twice, and both times he acknowledges most of the issues you spoke about. How nothing he is saying is necessarily new, but that people listen to him because he is white. Unfortunately, white people tune black people talking about racism out. If they are willing to listen to a white man say some of the same things, what do you propose we do?
I’ve thought a lot about white men such as Tim Wise, David Roediger, and Joe Feagin—whose work focuses on white supremacy, white privilege, race/racism, and oppression—and what is actually behind the reality of what these white men do. I struggle very much with a number of things—particularly as I am aware of the hiring trends in the academy where Wise, Roediger, and Feagin do their work.
I do want to readers to know that I am very glad that these white men are doing the work they are doing. We certainly need white people to do this work in their own communities, with their own peoples. However, in the face of these white masculine bodied voices, people of colors’ voices continue to be constructed as inauthentic, angry, and abrasive and they continue to be ignored when we speak about the realities of living with and through the consequences of neocolonialism and the permanence of imperialistic wars.
Wise and others need to fully address the realities of what it means to be white men doing this work. That is, I have never heard Wise discuss the power dynamics and relations that make it possible for him to do the kind of work he does. Wise is white and straight. There is an incredible amount of privilege there, including the important fact that he has TIME to research and write all the books that he has thus far. As a white man who works in a university in the U.S., his ethos immediately accords him some modicum of credibility—even if (white) people disagree with him.
White people have been trained (culturally and socially) and our culture has not only taught this, but affirmed, that the white male voice is THE voice: when it speaks listen.
Psychologically and psychically, white people have always had a very hard time listening to people of color, and being able to listen to Wise and others, means that many white people can bypass the very difficult emotional work they need to and should do around their relationship to a history of white supremacy. It’s similar to the way the majority of white progressive people use their green, vegan, recycling politics as cultural capital to buy their way out of charges of racism, classism, and etc.: Since I do these things, I cannot be racist or classist. In fact, many white progressives rarely want to look at the privilege they have to make the choices they make to do the “radical” progressive work they do.
Wise and others need to speak more directly to what it means that they can do the work they do, how their work is read against the work of people of color—especially people of color who are not in the academy or who are in the academy but are incredibly marginalized because the are resisting institutionalization. For example, the work he does gets him tenure (if he teaches at a university and/or teaching and workshop gigs), gets him book tours, gets him recognized by people of color doing the same work. What of the person of color who does the same thing? Sure s/he’ll get all that—perhaps—but the route s/he takes to get there is laid out very differently than it is for Wise. He really needs to address this, and not just in a sentence of two.
Cocoa_ice2, we’ll have to move ahead in the work we do, continuing to uncover the discrepancies that exist among how one’s voice is heard and speaking directly to the power dynamics that are underneath them. Some white people are always going to tune people of color out when they speak out about issues of oppression. This does not mean, however, that we stop talking. Really what it is: many white people are not at all cognizant how psychologically and psychically trapped they are in centuries old ideologies (and new articulations of these ideologies). Until they are willing to take that deep look inside themselves, to uncover all that has been hidden from them—how oppression functions in their in their own FAMILIES and in their own HOMES—, to recognize how colonized their own minds are by the foundational myths of this country continues to perpetuate, then we’ll never get anywhere. Everyone needs to do this work, white and nonwhite alike–and especially Tim Wise.
Wise might acknowledge, Eminem style, that he gets a disproportionate amount of attention b/c he’s white (of course he does – he’d lose *all* credibility if he didn’t), but like Eminem he keeps on taking those checks, and gets mightily defensive when not-white people call him on it (see comment thread on his blog here: http://bit.ly/ek8Re0). What’s worse is, he’s not half as good at what he does as Eminem.
I like your emphasis on the term ‘supremacy’ rather than ‘privilege.’ Another bit of supremacy that Wise enjoys is that he gets to deploy his little fake-ass quasi-’Black’ accent in his rhetoric, but doesn’t have to put up with idiots thinking he’s uneducated because he ‘preaches’ that way…
While I certainly agree that we shouldn’t get carried away in our praise of Tim Wise, or ever feel that somehow any work against racism has more validity when done by white people, I do think that perhaps this article and commenter Saladin are being a BIT too harsh on Wise.
I certainly agree that we should not allow Wise to get too comfortable in his position as an ally, that he should regularly be checked – and be encouraged to do self-checked – on his views, and on his approach to the work.
But I think this is something that Wise acknowledges himself; at least he seems to regularly mention to his white audiences that what he is saying is not new or unique, and that people of color have been and are saying the same things. What he does, is acknowledge his privilege, and more importantly, USES his privilege, which enables him to stand in front of those white audiences and not be dismissed out of hand.
In this video:
http://www.mediaed.org/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi?preadd=action&key=137&template=PDGCommTemplates/HTN/Item_Preview.html
Wise prefaces the entire speech by saying that near everything he is offering has come to him from people of color. More than anything else he was saying, that stood out to me as the most meaningful, because it showed that he is still very aware of his own privilege.
Thought-provoking and insightful commentary. This rings true in an unsettling and enlightening way, with the possible exception of one generalization. You claim that blacks are seen as “angry and militant” when speaking emotionally about racism, while whites are seen as “standing up passionately for an injustice.” The assumption made here is that this difference in perspective is due to race. While that may be true for some audiences, there is another psychological factor at work here that is worth consideration.
In part, what we’re dealing with is general human skepticism and cynicism getting in the way of compassion. To put it another way, no one likes to hear people complain about their own lot. We don’t like to hear about wrongs that need to be writed, so we assume bias if given the chance. If someone, anyone, comes to us and says “I am in terrible pain,” we have a knee-jerk tendency to assume exaggeration so we don’t have to deal with it.
On the other hand, if a third party with no personal investment in the problem says, “This person is in terrible pain,” we are more likely to listen and believe. We give more credence to whites (or Asians or Native Americans) speaking out against the oppression of blacks because we assume there is no bias, that what this “non-black” person is saying must be true, because otherwise, what’s in it for them to invest so much energy?
As a random example: how many times have I seen someone with fibromyalgia standing up and saying “this is a real disease! I hurt!” and being ignored? It takes someone without fibromyalgia standing up and saying “this is a real disease! These people hurt!” for anyone to take the issue seriously. (I do not have fibromyalgia, by the way. If I did, how would it affect your response to my example?)
I believe the same goes for any cause, any attempt to make others understand an injustice or suffering. We never listen to the sufferers; we tend only to respect those who suffer in silence; we somehow consider it gauche or uncouth to speak up and say, “Hey, this hurts.” It’s a separate reaction from racism, and should be taken into consideration.
Righted. No more posting before I’ve had my morning caffeine. My kingdom for an edit button.
I follow Tim Wise because he’s a forceful, precise, and persuasive communicator, in print and in public appearances. His ability to get his ideas across is unique, that’s what draws me to his commentaries.
Which public commentators should I be paying attention to instead? The fact is, I watched 10-12 videos from http://www.youtube.com/user/OsayandeSpeaks and the author of this post simply cannot stand up to Wise when it comes to public speaking.
Limiting the discussion only to the persuasiveness of their public speaking (because I don’t know enough about Osayande’s work in other areas and don’t want to cast unnecessary aspersions), Tim Wise’s work is far sharper, cogent, specific, concrete, and convincing.
This blog post makes it sound like Wise is a mediocre co-opter. In my eyes that’s an unfair and incorrect evaluation of his talents.
Lots to ponder on brother Ewuare! Thanks for putting this out there.
Tim Wise and the Progressive Plantation.
I appreciate this perspective by Euware to unmask Tim Wise, but I also have first-hand experience of the ineffectiveness and duplicity of Tim Wise as an anti-racist organizer. In 2006, I was hired as the first Black/POC administrator of the Nashville Peace and Justice Center in TN. Because Wise is a native Nashvillian, I asked him for his insights of the institution, the city, and the activist scene.
He acknowledged that he had tried to get a position there, but that they were very hostile to him as an anti-racist lecturer and organizer, even though that institution postured as an “anti-racist” organization. He nevertheless encouraged me to take the position as he thought it would force them to deal with their institutional racism. I agreed, and we met for lunch at least one time, and corresponded a number of times afterward by email b/c of his busy schedule, he said.
Throughout its 15-year history,the NPJC group had very few POC in any capacity, and had a reputation of hostility to even individual Black people, except for those that they used for token “cover”, when the group was attacked for charges of racism. I began to refer to it as a “progressive plantation” b/c it was fundamentally bankrupt and a thoroughly racist institution.
Because, I am an experienced organizer,[and encouraged by Wise] I made moves to radically transform the group, but the conservative white Board of Directors fought me tooth and nail, all the while, criticizing me for not holding anti-racist “enlightenment” sessions for the white members. I refused to play any phony games about “enlightenment” with a group that is fundamentally racist to the core. They had to be challenged, not molly-coddled that they were good people who were just misunderstood.
As a result, I began to be harassed on the job in a concerted campaign to make me quit the job, even in one instance, a Board member slapping papers out of my hand. All of the other Board members were right there and saw it, but when I filed a grievance, they later claimed not to have seen anything, and that I was making it up to harass the NPJC and that Board member.
When I asked for Time Wise’s support, he wrote a letter to the Board threatening them with legal action, and even promised to help me get an attorney for a civil rights employment case if they fired me. However, after I was fired by the Board for “insubordination”, he would not give me any support at all, saying he was “too busy.” When I criticized him over his lack of support and hypocrisy, he eventually stopped communicating at all. I was never able to get an attorney in Nashville, many of whom would say they “had a conflict of interest”, and the so-called “white progressive” community “white-listed” me.
I harshly re-learned a lesson that I had learned earlier in activist life: (1). White progressive foundations and nonprofit organizations are corrupt to the core, and are united with the ruling class to control and/or destroy oppressed communities of color. The white liberals are just the other side of the system of oppression and control; they just differ on strategy and perspective from conservatives; (2) white racism is a system that must be overthrown right along with the capitalist state. I do not mean to say that we POC must wait on white people to “get it”, but rather to understand that no amount of “enlightenment sessions” of white activists will change anything as long as they are in control of the agenda and united with the capitalists; (3) the necessity of POC autonomy in defining our own struggles and coming up with our own analysis is key. This is not “narrow nationalism” as the vulgar socialist and some anarchist tendencies claim, it is intelligence and self-defense from class collaborationism, opportunism, and other treachery which could undermine our liberation efforts, and defeat a revolution just as it did in the 1960′s.(4) We can only work with white people/activists around a position of shared responsibility on issues we might agree upon, and even then we coldly judge their willingness to follow POC, not try to lead or command us, and their ability to freely give their superior material resources without political preconditions, (5) their willingness to build an anti-racist liberation support movement for material aid and political support of our autonomous liberation movements, and their willingness to put their lives on the line to confront white supremacy and the state in support of our movement, not their own agenda. (6) Finally, the Mother Country radicals cannot claim to be “anti-racist allies” and show up on our doorstep, demanding that we accept them. We may accept them, but we also may reject them as false allies and deal with them accordingly. The past relationship with white radicals in many instances on this point has been unprincipled, and based on emotion, opportunism, or other wrongful factors. We decide who are our enemies and our friends, pure and simple, not white people who show up unbidden. Just remember we still live on a plantation.
So, to bring this discussion back in line with the issue, white progressives and white anti-racist lecturers like Tim Wise are still a privileged class. They even make more money and have more credibility that POC anti-racist activists or lecturers, who know first hand what racism is about. Wise is listened to just because of the novelty of a white man who vocally opposes racism…and is given access to the mass media. He may have deep seated beliefs, or like most whites, he may just be playing a role for pay and political advantage. Some black people are so duped and desperate for approval from white officials or celebrities that they adopt such people as “honorary Blacks.” Look at that nonsense with Bill Clinton just a few years ago, where certainly fawning talk show celebrities anointed him as a “Black President.”
This is just a singular tale, but what happened between me and Tim Wise is what almost always happens when it comes to dealing with white activists, we are left out in the cold, facing an angry white lynch mob, thirsting for black people’s blood. The Tim Wises seem to always exit stage right. He is yet another white opportunist, who makes a buck off our misery and oppression. Wise’s and the white Left’s whole idea of “enlightening” white people, while not forcing them to take action to oppose internal racism inside progressive institutions is the worst type of scam, and he should be harshly denounced and ideologically defeated by POC autonomous movements. His days of posturing and pontificating should be at end.
One last point, in reading Brother Euware’s essay further. It just struck me how white people like Tim Wise can steal and manipulate the story of blacks/POC and their long fight against racism/internal colonialism.
Whether it was the handlers of Elvis Presley at Sun Records, who stole and profited from Black music, or Tim Wise, who steals the narrative of anti-racist oppression today, what they are doing is using a white “cover” of the original to make it palatable to white people. That is how a no-talent Pat Boone made millions from his sorrowful career, and how Little Richard was ripped off.
We need to learn a lesson here, just as Euware states. White activist posturing or pontificating are not the same as real anti-racist liberation support work. Wise ain’t giving a dime to Black radical causes, and pimping our oppression to a white audience. Reminds me of that book “Uncle Tom’s Cabin”, which claimed to described the true feelings and the oppression of slaves.
Remember this, we live in a nation-state that had a 1770′s revolution that included thousands of Africans, but when it the colonists won gave freedom just to white people. No wonder that white people believe now that they can have a white-led revolution that only includes POC in a subservient role. We do the shit work and shed the blood, while they get the glory.
I live in Whitehaven the old Memphis neighborhood that Elvis Presley used to live in and where his Mansion is still located. Every day I drive by this sign across the street that quotes John Lennon: “Before Elvis there was nothing.” Imagine the incredible gall of such a statement. Where did gospel, jazz, and the blues come from that was the basis of rock n’ roll and rhythm n’ blues? It was Black people’s music.(these terms of “rock” and r n’ b by the way were created by the whites who controlled the music industry, and described music by Black artists as “race” music). White People claim to have invented “rock”, and have stolen black people’s cultural arts for years.
Tim Wise is another “cover artist” foisted on us by the white power structure which controls the communications industry. B/c he is white and the anointed critic in anti-racist matters, he is given the privilege to expound on these matters to a mass audience. He is as much an ideological and class enemy as any other pacification agent.We do need white people to pontificate, allegedly on our behalf, we need to discover our own voices. The Black power movement of the 1960′s proved that once we speak for ourselves, there is no need for a “cover artist” or white intermediary.
whoops, I made a mistake in the previous essay. We do *not need white people to pontificate on our behalf, based on our oppressed condition. We must speak for ourselves, and denounce all, friend or foe, who would steal in our name without our permission.
We can use white people, who are working with POC to overthrow the system of oppression, not those who only act when it is in their interests or for their profit. That is why we must overthrow racism, not apologize for it, even when it is internal to so-called progressive institutions or movements.
Angry Black man? I must be one. I am tired of being hit on the head, seeing Blacks unjustly imprisoned, shot down in the streets, massive black unemployment, or high black infant mortality. There is a system of racist oppression that accounts for all of this, and I am out to destroy it. I am not trying to convince white people of this, as much as I want to organize the victims of it. If white people are concerned, and they want to help, that is fine. But they should expect no special privileges or rank just b/c they do, and as soon as they begin to behave in a treacherous or racist fashion themselves they will be expelled and dealt with.
The very idea that we must “prove” to white people that our struggle is worthy is an insult of the worst sort, and just proves to what extent internal colonialism exists within so-called progressive movements. We need to take whatever actions we need to take to overthrow racism and capitalism, and not be bound by the sensibilities of white liberals or so-called Mother Country radicals.
I may be angry, but I am also have seen years of white radical opportunism, posturing, and sellouts, which makes me angry in the first place.
This is NOT about “one-upmanship”, its about being brutally honest about “what is”. It’s about calling a spade a spade. The terrible times we live in DEMAND it. Anything else is liberalism.
Greg, I do not have time for silly arguments like this. “porch monkeys”, “everybody in America is a fascist.” My ideas are in the prisons, more than on the college campuses. I have organized in communities my entire life, I don’t have to justify myself to you, and I have never claimed one of your writings, even though I have been criticized for it, and denied it time after time. When have you ever known me to print a pamphlet or article claiming work of yours? This is totally infantile, and discredits yourself, not me.
As for Tim Wise, my article was in response to another author. I was not talking about speaking at a college, he was, if you take them time to read what was written. However, You brought your criticism to me, not me attacking you. If you have a political or personal criticism, then bring it to me. i have
[Some comments presented on this page have been moved to pending, and will be reviewed by editors.]
there are so many contradictions in this article that i don’t even know where to begin.
first of all, i must say that i am a follower of wise, but i am also a follower of many mulitcultural voices that speak on race and oppression. i also don’t believe that a critique of wise is unwarranted–unfortunately many people take his word as gospel and do not follow his non-white associates and fellow fighters of the struggle. but this is not his fault–it is the fault of the educators who book him and not others he often collaborates with like michael eric dyson or melissa harris lacewell. my biggest critique of wise is that he tends to see things as polar opposites: you are either a freedom fighter or a racist pig. regardless, here is my critique of the article.
1. tim wise is a primary source when dealing with race because as he said “he is white and was born into a world where white privilege exists.” he is just on the other side of the color line, which is why his analysis of race matters differs from his non-white collaborators. while he cannot effectively articulate the full impacts that minorities experience from the oppressor class (nor do i believe he tries to), he CAN articulate the mentality of the oppressor class that looks like him. again, this is what makes him different than the race educators that this article claims he is stealing the spotlight from. which leads me to…
2. obviously tim wise can address a white audience in a different way because he is white. wise has always fully acknowledged his privilege–he even credits some of his success to privilege. but his message still gets across. anyone who says that tim wise does not address his privilege has obviously not read ANY of tim wise (which it seems that the person who wrote this article has not) because he is constantly talking about his privilege. in several of his essays and books, he comments on his struggles with racial identity and the racist tendencies bestowed upon him by his family and society. he speaks from privilege and admits him, which again makes him a treasure because white people who want to be liberators but who are still struggling with their own racist tendencies can see him as an archetype to model their behavior after.
3. wise constantly acknowledges the work of other anti-race activists–again, making the claim that he doesn’t leads me to believe that the person writing this article has not read much of wise because their claims are unwarranted and most of the attacks are ad hominem. i believe in one book he wrote he quoted james baldwin at the start of every single chapter. he has constantly been on panels with other non-white race activists and has a works cited reference page like every other responsible educator.
4. in dealing with education administrators, i have seen many anti-progressives who are also turned off by wise’s fiery rhetoric. it may not carry the same stigma as the view of passionate african-american speakers, but overall this is a very non-unique argument. many of the same people who book wise are the same people who would book one of his non-white allies. unfortunately, many schools and conferences do not do the culturally responsible thing and just book wise alone, instead of booking a multicultural series or panel of experts.
5. the author finally admits that he has bias because of his personal relationship with wise. sounds very classy.
6. tim wise cannot be blamed for racist idiots who talk about him, no more than che guevera can be blamed for idiots who wear che guevara shirts. how many people have misconstrued the words of amiri baraka or cornell west. again, this is a non-unique argument. it is unfortunate that administrators use him as a “good enough” example of racial progressivism. is this wise’s fault. no, so why the critique on wise and not the idiots who booked him for shady reasons? seems like scapegoating to me.
7. i have seen wise debate and speak with many many people on several different panels. the claim that he only debates conservatives is completely unfounded.
8. yes, it is unfortunate that people see tim wise as a phenomenon but the fact of the matter is that they do. he has stated that he is shocked by it too, but that is the reality of things. a common misconception is that ‘race’ is a non-white issue. however, race would not be a problem if it were not for racist whites. as wise says, “we have the causality backwards.” therefore, wise argues that more whites need to be aware of race and not just consider it an issue for minorities to talk about, because we are the ones that dictate race. if this author does not want white allies in the struggle then that is fine–but don’t blame us for attempting to close the racial divide. shit, even malcolm x finally accepted the help of non-african american activists. this dude just sounds bitter because wise gets booked more than he does. wise is not speaking on his behalf. he is speaking on the behalf of whites who need to take responsibilities for the wrong actions of our brothers and fathers.
i dunno, maybe i am sensitive, but when i started to read the article i was hoping for a good sensible critique of wise’s work because as i said, it is not unwarranted. but this seems like a bunch of jealous crap to me.
thoughts?
I guess the main and last thing to end this debate with is that Time Wise is not a revolutionary, nor is he an anti-racist *activist. He is a social critic, the problem with these kinds of anti-racist speakers is that white people generally will not own up to their own legacy of racism, genocide, and class collaborationism. That is why, in my estimation, most types of enlightenment and training sessions on racism are useless. I am not sure that what he does has any real value at all. Only a class of middle class whites have the time to sit around and debate fascists or racists in the government.
Racism/internal colonialism has to be challenged and overthrown, esp. by oppressed peoples, ultimately at the risk of one’s life. We cannot wait until white people decide to fight capitalism, and then decide racism is worth fighting out of their own “self-interest”. The question is what percent of white America will support us in that inevitable fight? People like Wise are theorists primarily, not activists who put anything on the line. They don’t get out in the streets to oppose fascists or cops/prison officials, not one time did I see him come out to a demo against racist/gov’t violence in Nashville in the four years I lived there.
So that, to me, is the real issue of this discussion, not anyone’s debating skills, or whether their speaker’s bureau is better than the other in securing college gigs. That is just an abstraction and distraction from the real issue under discussion.
@Lorenzo Komboa Ervin –
Wow- I admire you for even taking a position like that in TN. That took a lot of courage.
I just so happened to stumble across this website looking for something else. Very impressed with the posts I’ve read so far. I’ve never even heard of Tim Wise, but once I get back to the states (I’m overseas right now) I’ll keep my eyes open for him. Not sure if you’ve read the book “Black Like Me,” but the author of that story was a white man who painted his face Black and went to live in the south as a black man as an experiment and to write about it. After his ‘experiment’ he wrote about the horrid conditions he witnessed in the American south. He eventually became the “go to” guy on racism in America during that time. He pointed out that he was only invited to give his opinion on these things because he was white. He said it never even occurred to his white counterparts doing the interviews to even consult with anyone black at that time. I found that to be amazing.
The reality is, many black people are still afraid of rocking the boat when it comes to speaking out against racism and their plight in this country. For this reason I I think they feel relieved when someone else (even if white) comes along to fight on their behalf. Like Lorenzo stated earlier the whole system would have to be thrown out and that won’t happen until everyone is desperate enough to unite together. We’re almost there let the banks keep playing around with our money and livelihood and I can see things accelerating.
No disrespect to anyone, but the higher education system in America is one of the most racist institutions in this country. This is where racism is created and perpetuated for generations. I admire anyone who would even attempt to work this circuit as a speaker against racism. Realize it is all a show for them and a way to spend they money they get from the government to bring you in as a speaker.
Should of listened to Sista Souljah…
@Lorenzo Komboa Ervin –
I feel you. I don’t care about being called angry anymore. I’d rather be conscious and angry than unconscious and happy. Ignorance might be bliss, but only for a short time trust me.
@Henzbo –
I see your point, but I think it’s only human to be a bit angry/jealous or whatever when you see someone capitalizing off what you do and maybe not as sincere or good at doing it.
@Lisa Clarkson –
To me, I find your comments to be rather petty and quite subjective. If that is the worst you can say about Ewuare Osayande, then that is saying a lot for Osayande. I have actually heard Ewuare Osayande speak several times and found he is clear, concise, sincere and passionate. In his speeches he doesn’t come off as though he is trying to win a popularity contest. I attended a Tim Wise lecture and found him impossible to follow and understand, and he was often comedic about a very serious topic. As a woman I was actually quite offended by how he spoke about his wife. He came off to me as being very condescending in his conversation on women. Whereas whenever I have heard Osayande speak he conveys a sincerity that is consistent regardless of the topic he is addressing at the time.
But, if your cup of tea is white men who talk a talk they won’t walk, more power to you.
@Henzbo – Most of your criticisms of Osayande’s essay are off-base distortions and outright skewed. I’ll respond to them individually over time. You indicate up front that you are a “follower” of Wise and so that should give the reader pause. Your first defense of Wise is disingenuous. To say that it is not his fault that he has become the darling of the academy with his calendar filled year-round with engagements is to avoid or dismiss Osayande’s inherent point. There is nothing stopping Wise from rejecting those offers, or doing the more principled thing – to suggest an activist of color that the academy would not otherwise consider due to their racism. The only reason one can say he doesn’t do this is because of his own sense of self-importance and/or greed. He hinders the day he claims to want to see when he says that true progress will occur when these same schools listen to people of color. That won’t happen as long as he is accepting these engagements when they come to him. I know men that have encouraged schools to hire women to speak during Women’s History Month for an example. Wise can do the same.
@Mishell Baker – One wonders who you mean by “us”, “we” as in “we don’t like to hear people complain about their own lot”, etc. One could turn that around and say that we, meaning humans as a whole, are actually interested in the suffering of our fellows and want to hear from them directly so we can establish meaningful solidarity. It’s one thing to propose one or the other view as your personal opinion, but you cite the one you prefer as if it is an indisputable fact, and then build an argument on that flimsy connection.
It is all the more troubling since it seems to essentialize white reluctance to hear POCs’ truths as if it is natural and value-neutral. Beyond merely lacking evidence, this view fails to account for the interest of disparate groups of POC in establishing direct links of solidarity and mutual aid with each other. By the logic you have proposed, Black and Latin@ people could define themselves as separate and say “I don’t want to hear someone from the other group complain about their lot in life.” But they have to talk about such things as a survival method, getting to know the common oppressor. To give a more obvious example, I could simply assert that people from Compton and people from Harlem face separate struggles and that people from Compton don’t want to hear people from Harlem complaining about their own lot. Yet, this would clearly be absurd, because you used this same logic to group black people together as one unit with one lot in life. I’m just pointing out how flimsy this long, tortured rationalization is and how it can be used to support just about any absurd claim.
I don’t feel like I’m in a position to assess Tim Wise in any comprehensive way, but this article is the first I’ve read that gives me some sense of why I might find his work completely uninteresting. I have never understood why, in a field full of people of color, I’m immediately told to go read the white guy whose name has become the only name mentioned in the context of antiracism work.
This is exactly what I’ve been saying all along! White “anti-racists” – all of them! – need to close their mouths, go home and stay out of the way of people who are actually doing the hard work of trying to dismantle white supremacy. I don’t mean to be rude, but really… I am appreciative of the good intentions some whites have, truly I am, but I am NOT appreciative of the way they keep impeding real progress by muddling in the affairs of our communities! Keep those good intentions at home, ALL OF YOU!
This might sound harsh, but here’s how it is: Whites benefit from and prop up the system of white-supremacy whether they want to do so or not. There’s no way to avoid it, even when trying to do “anti-racist” work. As long as white-supremacy continues to be a reality in our society, we can’t fight white-supremacy with white-supremacy. I mean think about it, doesn’t it seem a little absurd for people to try to work against racism and white-supremacy in their communities when they themselves are racist and benefit like mad from white-supremacy? Come on!
I mean seriously, case in point: How many times have you seen white “anti-racists” either expect US to each them to be “good” little anti-racists, or steal the words and thoughts of OUR activists and reap all the benefits? And since they have no experiences of racism of their own whatsoever to rely on… what can they contribute, really? All they can do is exploit us, making the problem worse when they’re trying to “help”.
So yeah… white “anti-racists”, please keep standing in solidarity, but at HOME!
This post was excellent, having just attended the “White Privilege Conference in Minneapolis MN, I was amazed and impressed by Michele Alexander and many oft eh other presenters but then was disgusted when the conference turned to a white academic to speak on the loss of the land of indigenous people.A speaner Steve martinot who diud not for one do a good job covering the subject, a speaker who calls himself “the most dangerous White Guy in America?” He was dry unenthusiastic and deficient and read his speech verbatim from one of his books?
To highlight the ridiculousness of it all? This is in Minneapolis Minnesota? Home of Bill Means AIM leader and longtime spearhead of the International Indian Treaty Conference? Home of Clyde Bellecourt founder of AIM and legendary treaty rights activist? Home of Janice Denny longtime AIM activist and leader? Home of David Larson Mdewakaton Dakota historian and spiritual leader who was asked to give a prayer at the opening but not to speak of the history of genocide and land theft of his people?
Much of the conference was great, but this mistake was a putrid example of the coopting of the struggle.
Then we have the example of Ward Churchill? Much worse than Tim Wise? Here is a man who has never lived a hard day in his life in an Indian Community, who has been publicly denounced by every tribe he has claimed membership in? Who supported the Contras backed by the CIA in the 80s. Who has attacked American Indian Movement founders and leaders for years and then somehow has been chosen by white people to be “America’s radial Indian”. Can any of you even imagine how infuriating this could be?
I am sure several will respond to this ti defend Churchill because of his radical positions. AIM has long contended he was an infiltrator, Speak Out spotl;ights him as America’s Indian leader, even though every American Indian organization, tribe, and radical leaders have demanded he cease and desist his tapestry of ridiculousness.
It will not stop. It is important to remember that Churchill was made head of Native American studies at University of Colorado and was able to be granted tenure after only two years and never had to go through the rigorous process other professors do in gaining tenure.
Throughout all of this American Indian leaders, tribes, and resistance groups demanded he be held to the light.
Here is the really difficult part of this, most AIM leaders who fouhgt at Wounded Knee, who have spent years in prison, who continued to live on reservations, who continue to struggle to this day? They are never on the short list of speakers brought in to campuses to speak. Tribal elders who have lived in poverty most of their lives ignored.
If you want an Indian leader to speak to people about the Indian experience in the USA? Could you please at least bring someone who has lived in an Indian community?
There is a huge cottage industry of people who speak on their research of Indian people, speak of their experiences meeting and talking to Indians researching them.
How insulting, how cheap, how racist. Anyway loved the above article. Wanted to add this perspective.
Posoh Ogitchidaa
Modern North Amerikan anti-racist theorizing and practice, even from the most seemingly radical sources, is actually highly colonial and colonizing with regards to our people, Native people, so I am not surprised by what you experienced.
That said, you and others in this thread might be interested in an article I posted here on POCO! the other day called “Decolonizing Antiracism” by anadian Native activist-scholar Bonita Lawrence and Canadian-Indian scholar of race and gender Enakshi Dua. They examinethe ways in which indigenous people, indigeneity and the fact of ongoing settler colonialism and anti-colonial struggles has been conspicuously absent or put in a secondary position in Canadian (and U.S.) anti-racist theorizing and activism. They set out to put racism and anti-racist struggles and theories within the context of ongoing colonialism in North Amerika.
You can find it here http://www.peopleofcolororganize.com/general/decolonizing-antiracism/
i very much appreciate this critique and collective self-reflection. It is urgent, overdue, and necessarily a bit painful. I wonder at the great things that might be done and imagined (simultaneously) if the ascendancy of the white anti-racist position could simply be exploded. I also wonder how this would allow for a different set of radical antiracist analytics to take ascendancy.
A thought provoking critique written with clarity and insight. That said, Tim Wise can reach a number of people, many of whom are white, that may not otherwise listen or hear the message of anti-racism. I think embracing the message without completely ripping apart the messenger and looking for underlying racist motives may be in order – at least some of the time. Otherwise, it’s just damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
@FORSE
I was going to say you are entitled to your own opinion, and I am entitled to mine, but thank you for throwing in your last line which reveals that you are perfectly willing to mischaracterize someone else’s subjective opinion in order to make you feel better about your own.
I’ve read through all the comments posted and I have taken points from each one of them. However, I have one question and I am hoping you can address. What is the common ground?
Thanks for this piece. As a white gay man living in the northeast who is interested in combating racism, what is the message I should take from this article? Unfortunately, the message I’m getting (especially from the comments) is “fuck off.” Any ideas of what I should do to avoid being racist and/or a faux anti-racist? Or is being labeled as such simply the price of admission, no matter what I do?
I completely agree with your idea, Ewuare, that “white anti-racist” is an oxymoron. That it is important to agitate not only for a kind of critical attitude toward white supremacy but for a recognition that whiteness and white supremacy cannot be disentangled…This article needed to be written. It pushes up against a kind of impossibility, the impossibility of the world in which non-white activists are not overlooked in the knowledge industries in favor of “white anti-racists”…it makes me think of an idea of Frank B. Wilderson’s, which is that if and when blacks are recognized as fully human, as fully equal subjects, the world as we know it will end. So this prerequisite that you ask for which would excuse Wise’s arrogance (the society which was capable of actually listening to non-white anti-racist voices just as readily) is one which disturbs ALL categories of value in our world, but which is vitally necessary.
This makes me inclined to say that such a disturbance, a tipping or reversal from one society to another, must take into account the idea which James Baldwin stated a number of times, which he took, in part, from Malcolm El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz, which is that whiteness is not a recognizable feature, per se, but a state of mind, a moral and epistemological system of comprehension. He says outright in his speech, the recording of which, by Horace Ove, is entitled “Baldwin’s Nigger,” that you cannot recognize a white person by the way he or she looks.
Maybe this is the most confusing part of Baldwin, but I’ve seen it taken up in different ways by Toni Morrison, Adrian Piper and Hortense Spillers, among others, who argue that blackness must be reinvented as something beyond, beneath, or beside recognizable physical characteristics, perhaps because physical features as the index of race have always been the modus operandi of white supremacy.
@dreamofsafety –
So to finish that thought, and to pick up on Ignatiev’s point, the abolition of whiteness, the abolition of white people, of people who mistakenly believe themselves to be white and speak of communities which have only ever been corporations for the exploitation of people, does not require the extermination of light-skinned people of European descent, which is the fear of nearly all of them, the fear of the doomsday which has been well-earned, the chickens come home to roost. This “solution” would be equal to white supremacy and no better, so it is time that white people know that the abolition of whiteness will not be the mirror image of the genocides which created whiteness or made people believe in its necessity, but something else entirely, and something which is, in a bizarre and curious way, even more terrifying, because it will not occur within the simple logic of racial punishment…
[...] 18th, 2011 by lizziecocker af lizziecocker Ewuare Xola OsayandePeople of Color Organize“My friends, I have come to tell you something about slavery – what I know of it, as I have felt [...]
Its unusual for me to discover some thing on the web thats as entertaining and intriguing as what you have got here. Your page is lovely, your graphics are outstanding, and whats more, you use source that are relevant to what you are talking about. Youre definitely 1 in a million, keep up the good work!
I like some of Wise’s work, so this article really opened my eyes to some of the contradictions of white activists and non-activists who appoint ourselves as “allies” to the anti-racist movement, especially when we benefit from racism and our privilege. Thanks to Ms. Osayande for this kick in the pants.
@Ben Fenton – *Mr. Osayande, apologies.
I could easily be categorized as one of the white, liberal anti-racists referred to on this site, albeit an Australian version. I am the mother of a Kenyan-Australian child so I often read about racism and what can be done to eradicate it.
I was saddened to read of Ewuare Xola Osayande’s experiences lecturing in universities in the United States where he was treated so disrespectfully, especially in comparison with Tim Wise. But isn’t this what Tim Wise points out himself: the hypocrisy of white liberals in their preference of listening to him above speakers who are POC?
I am a white liberal who has mostly followed academics/novelists who are POC. I have read the books of Australian Aboriginal writers like Sally Morgan, Eric Wilmot and Ruby Langford-Ginibi as well as African American writers such as Dr MLK, Franklin Douglas, Maya Angelou & Lynn E Harris to name a few. I am not writing this to gain accolades, merely to demonstrate my desire to learn about the experiences of POC from POC. It seemed axiomatic that reading the work of POC and speaking to POC was the best way to do this.
A few weeks ago, I discovered Tim Wise. I was impressed with his passion and desire to eradicate racial inequality. What struck me in particular was his ability to work with other whites to unmask the privileges they obtained unfairly as a result of past and present crimes (regardless of whether or not they have committed these crimes themselves). Wise tells whites that if they want to learn about racism they should listen to POC because they are the ones who can explain it best. I did not hear him say that whites should listen to him in lieu of POC, quite the contrary. He is not asking whites to feel guilty about their privilege but to acknowledge it and take responsibility for doing something about racial inequality.
The fact that many of the white liberals in the universities where Ewuare Xola Osayande teaches do not ‘get’ Wise’s message can hardly be blamed on him and I dread to think that these whites are representative of all white liberals.
I will continue to seek out the work and viewpoints of POC in every domain in which they have excelled as they provide good role models for my child. In terms of my own journey however, I will refer to the work of Tim Wise when I am challenging other whites about their racism and to remind myself of my own white privilege and the ongoing need to address it to create a better world for all.
I’m not sure to what extent this might be something of a consolation, but as a UK based researcher on issues of ‘privilege’ and inequalities (right now on the gay/white/cis/male intersection described as ‘homonormative’, but that’s tangential) I’ve done a fair amount of reading on what has become known as Whiteness studies. Tim Wise hasn’t ever really come up, he might well publish academic papers but I honestly can’t say I’ve ever read one so he obviously isn’t taken very seriously, over here at least. That’s not to suggest that similar processes aren’t evidently operating *cough* lack of POC faculty at my ‘cosmopolitan’ institution*cough*.
Ignatiev on the other hand I certainly have heard of and while he might well be considered radical, I’m unsure that his thesis of ‘Abolish the White Race’ is especially helpful as anything other than interesting rhetoric. On a practical, activism orientated level, what would such an ‘abolition’ look like and what would pale skinned folk who claim to be working towards such a goal actually achieve, in the here and now?
From my, admittedly limited, experience there are two issues here. First is the suggestion that one can disassociate oneself from privilege, from one’s social positionality through a claim to no longer identify as ‘white’. It’s been a while since I last read Ignatiev I must admit and I’m sure his analysis is more complex then this but the claim that one can do away with your own position of power, privilege and yes supremacy is problematic even purely at a theoretical level. It is the fallacy that by identifying as ‘anti-racist’ or however you want to term it, that you are subsequently no longer complicit with/within relations of domination and marginalisation. Not to mention that the vast majority of everyday privileges are conferred upon the subject from external sources, whether you desire them, whether you claim them or not.
This leads into my second problem and returns to the practical issues of how Ignatiev’s work has been used in activist circles, at least over here. Overwhelmingly, in mine and others’ experience, Ignatiev’s work is almost exclusively used as a way of shutting down critique or activities in all sorts of ways. POC-only events have been gatecrashed by pale skinned ‘abolitionists’ (yes, I’ve heard them calling themselves that); suggestions that activist groups (for example in LGBT organising which is my more regular haunt) shouldn’t be entirely white run/white orientated have been met with the ‘post-race’ / white is ‘Abolished’ here line which serves to replicate exclusions.
So, while I’m pretty sure Ignatiev’s name was used illustratively, I get twitchy around references to his work and I thought I would write a bit about why.
Anyway, transatlantic wishes of joy and respect
While I don’t have a Tim Wise “burn” story, I can’t escape the accuracy of him as a cover artist, like Elvis. Having paid my dues dealing with white liberal anti-racists, having my own blues to sing as a result, when their actions reified white supremacy, I realized that in preaching to the choir, there is no reason the choir can’t learn to play jazz. I mean that more than metaphorically, as Be Bop, had the same anti-racist sensibility as conscious hip-hop, albeit more fundamentally coded. One could use music, code historical references into song titles, or music itself, use those expressions to code instruction and information. Strange Fruit, What do they call me?, Oscar Browns Work Song and Bid Em’ In…
We’re playing “race music” and Elvis, Tim Wise, the Beatles, the Stones, the Grateful Dead, make our “rock and roll” their own. That doesn’t mean we don’t teach the choir to play better, by identifying our science and strategy. Certainly that must include, who is an ally, and who is a distractor.
Powerful words. True words. What advice can anyone give me? My mother is Colombian, my dad white. I live in an extremely racist part of the country – northern Indiana. (But we can’t be racist because we all go to church and talk about social justice). A few years ago I started a small community theater in an effort to give people of color a shot at really good parts – something besides the gangsta, the maid, the nanny, the butler, etc. When we did The African Company Presents Richard III, the community reaction was incredible even though the local paper refused to even acknowledge us. The young (black) man who had the lead was inspired to return to school to study acting. But since then it’s been an uphill battle. The black actors who could be leading the way have opted for demeaning, humiliating roles with the local theater; latino actors simply don’t show up. People I try to recruit usually give me a long list of things they won’t do or won’t say – they just want to do church plays. Am I wrong to be going up against the entrenched racism of this town if I can’t get support from the people being most damaged by it? Why can’t I do a multiracial Streetcar Named Desire? When I do children’s plays, the parents of the black or latino kids often don’t bring them to the performance. Or they tell me, “Nobody gives my child orders.” Orders? I just want them to come to rehearsal, as was agreed! So, what am I running up against? Do I just walk away and if people are happy playing demeaning stereotypes, shrug, and keep my mouth shut? The communities of color seem not to want to rock the boat – but that river is dry! Please advise!
Hi Margie,
First, it’s very important that you understand the psychological effects that centuries of European terroism has had on Black and Brown people. Centuries of torture, displacement, commodification, and misuse has many of us scared to be involved in anything outside of the normal parameters given to us. Imagine suffering centuries of abuse and being told what is acceptable behavior for “your race” and for your people to stay safe. As an African women, I can tell you first had that the most acceptable and conventional place for me is in the church. While this is a notion I strongly resist, many Black and Brown women have accepted that this position will keep them out of harms way. Of course, most thinking people know that is not true, but that is how many of us cope with our daily realities of marginalization and imminent danger.
So when the parents tell you they only want to do church plays and don’t want you to boss their children around, understand this comes from years of resentment from being commanded as property to do whatever a white person told us. And now as administrative servants in public and private industry, we are still being commanded and told what to do. As a result, when it comes to our children (where we are supposed to have ultimate control), we will be hyper-sensitive to any advance that seems to undermine our authority.
Finally, being that the environment and social realities are different in every part of this country, we can’t give you specific advice on how to get people to warm up to your ideas. Furthermore, as a person who I assume appears to be white physically (because you can be of any Ethicity in Colombia, so I don’t want to be presumptious and say that you are white), it’s really nothing you can do to liberate POC from our mental conditions. That is work we must do ourselves. That is the essence of what Kwame Ture meant when he told white people to organize in their own communities and to work in solidiarty with POC. Honestly, we can’t rely on white or people who have white privelege (regardless of their nationality) to free us.
So I suggest that you study books that analyze the racial history of this country and the mental conditions of being colonized (note that I say colonized because that is the primary condition POC live under, race is a tool of colonialism). When you step back and study historical and current conditions, you will better understand the responses you receive and you can attempt to formulize a better strategy. One thing is for sure, you must enlist adult POC FROM the communities your working with in your endeavour, or you run the risk of being a Tarzan figure, and POC will always be weary of such an advance. I suggest you start off by reading Albert Memmi’s The Colonizer and the Colonized, Franz Fanon’s The Wretched of the Earth, and Kwame Ture’s Ready for the Revolution. I think that will give you a good starting point from which to understand the conditions for POC in the world and in this country, and it will help you understand the apprehension you encounter.
Zari Sundiata above relates that “it’s really nothing you [a non-POC] can do to liberate POC from our mental conditions. That is work we must do ourselves. That is the essence of what Kwame Toure meant when he told white people to organize in their own communities and to work in solidiarty with POC.” El Hajj Malik El Shabazz also suggested that same strategy to white people who wanted to work against racism.
The impression I have of Tim Wise is simply that his target audience is white people, and he aims to enlighten them about their white privilige (or supremacy, if you will). As far as I have seen, he is not trying to “take over” in the sense that he is trying to tell POC about racism, white privilige, or anything else. So, he is basically just doing the kind of work within the white community that our esteemed leaders have suggested that white people should. So why the hate against Mr Wise? He might not be the best at what he does, as a person he may act like an asshole sometimes, but can we really blame him for the fact that some of our people are fascinated by his words?