I don't understand this really

[james_davis_nicoll]

But apparently white people whose relatives were progressives back when that was dangerous get full credits for that even if they had no choice in the decisions or actions involved (In my case, because I was not born yet). Yay me! I can claim at least two generations of social liberals on my father's side and while I have never done anything of note in this field [1], at least I have not been an active impediment.

I understand that those people who were denied the basic rights due any human are supposed to be grateful to that handful of oppressors who somehow managed to meet the minimum level of human decency and who worked to mitigate some of the obvious social inequities of the time. Will the oppressed know to bask in the pearly white glow of my good luck in picking my relatives or will I need to hand out cards announcing that that my ancestors weren't the complete assholes most of the rest of their social class were at the time?

What else is covered by this policy? Can I claim to be an important engineer because my father and grandfather made notable (but distinct) contributions to that field?


1: I have voted for politicians who grudgingly did the right thing once the polls made it obvious which way the public leaned and after the courts made it clear they had no real choice in the matter.

Comments

[seawasp]

I don't accept any guilt for anything I, personally, did not do or directly contribute to doing. So I don't accept guilt for oppression of blacks, asians, gays, women, etc., etc. What my ancestors did has no relevance to what *I* do, did, or will do. If I ever successfully oppress Stupid People Who Shouldn't Be Driving Cars, bullies, and Usenet Posters Foolish Enough to Disagree With Me, I'll take the credit, though.

[ross-teneyck.livejournal.com]

But on the other hand, if you're a white person, particularly a white male person, in modern America, then you live in a system that benefits you and penalizes non-white-males in a variety of ways, some subtle and some less so.

"Guilt" may not be the appropriate response to this -- as you say, you didn't create the system, and neither did I -- but acknowledging that it exists is an appropriate, I would argue required, response. And of course an awareness of what current actions you and I do, or don't do, that either strengthen or weaken that system.

(On a related topic, my "favorite" conservative-pundit response to Obama's election so far is, "At least those damned liberals will finally have to admit that there's no more racism in America.")

[seawasp]

Sure, it exists. I am not going to complain about my own advantages. But I didn't put it in place, nor do I promote it if I encounter it impeding someone who shouldn't be being impeded.

AFAIC, people are people. If they're jerks, they need oppression. If they're not, let 'em do their own thing as long as it doesn't threaten ME(and those I'm responsible for).

[lostwanderfound.livejournal.com]

Sure, it exists. I am not going to complain about my own advantages. But I didn't put it in place, nor do I promote it if I encounter it impeding someone who shouldn't be being impeded.

There is a legitimate question as to whether or not you have an active ethical duty to seek to correct a system that unfairly harms others, however. Niemöller and all that.

[kraig.livejournal.com]

It is unclear to me that it is ethical to require[0] white males like myself (and, I think, seawasp, and perhaps yourself?) to expend a special and extra effort to undo a system we did not put into place. That seems to be just another form of scapegoating, albeit with a twist. Certainly the world needs champions, but my family needs *me*. I do my part by treating other people exactly how I wish them to treat me, regardless of their sex, race, creed, physical ability, or any other uncontrollable trait one can name.

[0] In a moral, not a legislative sense.

[adrian-turtle.livejournal.com]

Do you think it's ethical to require people to help protect entire communities from the effects of earthquakes and hurricanes? There is no blame implicit in saying, "You have more power to help than some of your neighbors, so it is more important that you help." People who were most severely and directly harmed (by racism or natural disasters) tend to be eager to join in repair work. But all kinds of repair work go faster and better when more people participate.

[kraig.livejournal.com]

No. But we're not talking about hurricanes and earthquakes. Those are relatively straightforward compared to removing artificial barriers to Those People (for whatever definition happens to apply, different race, different sex, etc) put into place by Us.

I accept that it's more important that I help, because by accident of birth, I *am* an Us, but I won't be made to feel guilty for failing to live up to somebody else's idea of what I should be doing.

[badgerbag.livejournal.com]

Well that's very clear of you. Nice to tie it straight to patriarchy with your "my family first".

[kraig.livejournal.com]

No, it's on my wife's orders, so it's tied to a matriarchy. (She's even a mother.) Thanks for playing though.

[jjhunter]

But what about treating other people how they would like to be treated?

Not that one should pander to the jerks and bullies of the world, but how you want to be treated and the basic levels of decency and respect you expect from other people are not necessarily going to be what other people expect or respect.

I understand the nobility behind wanting to treat everyone equally, but that's not the same thing as treating everyone identically or imposing your personal and/or cultural norms of respect and decency on how you think others want to be treated.

[kraig.livejournal.com]

Well, part of how I'd like to be treated is to have my own cultural norms of respect and decency respected. So I do my best to do the same. So there.

That being said, I understand your point. Suffice it to say I'm not trying to say *I* don't go out of my way to help people who need it; I'm trying to say I don't do so out of a feeling of guilt, and I wouldn't try to guilt or shame somebody else into behaving in a similar manner.

I could probably do more. Who can honestly say anything different?

[jjhunter]

part of how I'd like to be treated is to have my own cultural norms of respect and decency respected.

Worth emphasizing. There are a lot of people who never even think to consider that subtlety, and if you include it in your own statements of belief, you might just make someone else stop and think about it for the first time.

I'm trying to say I don't do so out of a feeling of guilt, and I wouldn't try to guilt or shame somebody else into behaving in a similar manner.

I definitely agree with this point. Guilt and shame are our brains' way of throwing on the brakes and making us reexamine our own behavior; they are not healthy long-term motivations for positive activism, however important or praiseworthy, since they set up a false choice between self-esteem and activism.

I could probably do more. Who can honestly say anything different?

Personally, I go for 'do no unnecessary harm;' I reject the idea that one has to travel halfway around the world to Make A Difference, or devote all of one's free time to Worthy Causes to be a good person and have a positive effect on the world. Invest in your family and your friends and those with whom you come in daily contact. Invest time and emotional energy into building strong connections between yourself and others, and helping others do the same. Make and/or strengthen communities, and create safe spaces for people to grow and flourish, and you will be making your world, and ultimately The World, a better place not just for others, but also yourself.

Anyway, thanks for listening, and thank you for your thoughtful response.

[mindstalk.livejournal.com]

plus donate money or pay taxes to support those who *do* want to go halfway around the world to treat malaria or build water systems or teach.

[jjhunter]

Mm, yes. There are so many different types of action and support for action: financial, social, rhetorical, emotional, analytical/critical, temporal, and doubtless more I'm forgetting to mention. Offering support is a form of investment of social, personal and/or political capital, and I strongly believe in supporting community organizers at home or abroad.

When you expand your definitions of the communities you belong to, and invest in those communities as a way of investing in a shared world and a shared future--isn't that much more healthy in the long-term than investing out of guilt or a desire to appear PC or SC (Socially Correct)?

[seawasp]

I agree that I have an ethical duty to seek to correct that system -- but with the caveat that I have a *MUCH* higher ethical duty to tend first to those people for whom I am directly responsible for: myself, my wife, my children, and other immediate family and close friends. If I have resources and opportunity outside of these duties which permit me to direct energy against the unfair system, yes, I should do so.

[james-nicoll.livejournal.com]

no more racism in America.

Just like Kennedy showed anti-Catholicism was dead in the US. That's why there have been so many Catholic Presidents since JFK.

[rivka.livejournal.com]

I don't accept any guilt for anything I, personally, did not do or directly contribute to doing.

Are you the same way about pride? I mean, for example, do you feel no pride and accept no credit for the positive elements of American history? Do you refrain from patriotism because stuff other Americans do or have done has no relevance to what *you* do or have done?

If so, cool, at least you're consistent. But I ask because plenty of people seem happy to identify with their ancestors storming the beach at Normandy, or the Founding Fathers writing the Constitution, but when it comes to slavery or Jim Crow suddenly the topic has nothing to do with them because it's all ancient history that happened before they were born.

[kraig.livejournal.com]

Is there no difference between guilt and shame?

For instance, I am proud of what my grandfather did 1940-1947. He enlisted, went overseas, came closer to sudden death more times in a couple of years in France/Belgium/Germany than I'm likely to in my lifetime, won the eye and heart of a wonderful woman, brought her back home after his post-war tour was over, and started a family.

If he was ever a racist, sexist, or any other -ist that I'd associate with negativity, then I'd be ashamed. (He wasn't, not that I know of. He took as much pride in my mother's PhD as he did in my serving in the Army.) But I wouldn't feel *guilty* or a requirement to make amends, just as I don't feel I'm *owed* anything because of my grandfather's actions.

Similarly, I'm ashamed of some of the actions of my ancestors and current fellow citizens. But I don't feel guilty because some idiot in Nova Scotia hates Natives, nor do I feel guilty because Cornwallis killed a bunch. I just strongly wish the idiot didn't and that Cornwallis hadn't.

[seawasp]

I certainly take no CREDIT for anything in American history. I can be proud of certain achievements in the sense that "I'm glad they did that and it's nice to be associated with that, however remotely", but the reverse feeling of "I don't like that and I don't want to be associated with it" doesn't equate to personal guilt that I'm accepting.

I certainly have no personal pride based on my ancestors. My father, yes, because I was part of his life and watched what he did, and he did things for and with me. Similarly, my mother worked and achieved much, and I was proud of her too. But I didn't take personal credit for their achievements, nor do I take any personal guilt in anything they may have done which was wrong.

(None of my ancestors, insofar as I'm aware, did anything of particular historical note unless you start going back to the time of Eric the Red. I may be the most "important" person in my family in terms of what might actually be remembered by someone after I die, and that's not saying much)