I've replied to each of your points in turn here, but as it's really long, I wanted to put this one up top. It's a response to point number 5 that you made. If you only think about one thing from everything I've written here, please let it be this:
5. So your experience of racism is as "a racist living among racists". And you're arguing with a black man in defence of a book written by a racist about how to be less racist. Do you not see the problem here? Seriously, do you not see it?! This is what's so frustrating about this conversation.
And even beyond that, what attitude does this book "written for white people" tell you you should have in this situation? How do you think you're doing as far as holding up the ideas in the book you're currently arguing in defence of? What are you trying to achieve here?
You're comparing your experience of being on the giving end of racism to mine being on the receiving end. To mine having grown up with people on the receiving end of segregation and Jim Crow. Do you really think our experiences are comparable? In addition, I also have experience of the ugly things racists say. I've spoken face-to-face with avowed racists about racism. I've even changed some of their minds. It's breathtaking to me that you don't understand this.
Your experience of racism is available to me. Mainly because racists say racists stuff amongst themselves and to black people. But my experience isn't available to you. Which is why it's worth listening to carefully instead of dismissing.
-----------------
1. Yes, not just Jim Crow per se. I'm including redlining and contract buying under that heading although they aren't technically Jim Crow.
2. Her book doesn't have to be about the entire human condition, but it should recognise that she's talking about humans who have more to them than the colour of their skin. She fails to do this for white people or for black people, speaking in huge sweeping generalities that utterly fail to capture the nuance of human interaction.
As her book is substantially about human interaction, this makes it seriously flawed from the foundation.
And no, I don't think it's a good thing to be circumspect as long as you're polite and willing to listen. Again, people talk about white privilege like it's some kind of all-powerful weapon that black people live in terror of. How do you think your white privilege is affecting our conversation? Why weren't you circumspect in your initial response? Do you actually believe in the ideas you're defending? Because your actions don't bear them out.
The data presented talks about Trump but by no means cites him as the sole source of the division. In fact, perceptions actually got slightly better in 2016. The data in the second link shows that perceptions have been falling since before he became president. And optimism is not the same as current perception.
3. What have I made up? If I have, I apologise but I don't think I have at all.
Read your initial comment and imagine a stranger wrote that to you. Tell me it's not condescending and arrrogant.
4. No, just because some people don't agree with DiAngelo doesn't mean that she'd be attacked. She's not speaking with the angry hordes, she's speaking with one person in a controlled setting about her supposed field of expertise.
People might go on Twitter and say mean things about her afterwards, but that already happens. There are plenty of people who think that she's racist and divisive already.
You seem to be assuming that her ideas would be exposed in some way so there's nothing for her to gain, which actually I think they would too, but again, if she doesn't have the confidence in her ideas that she thinks they can withstand criticism, she shouldn't be spreading them.
And yes, people dedicate their lives to things they don't care about all the time if they make them rich and/or boost their ego. I think this work does both for her. That's what I think she's afraid of losing by debating.
5. See above.
6. I do hear that. But your experience of racism as a self-confessed racists among racists is hardly likely to be very in tune with the majority of black people. Do you see that? As racism affects us, don't you think you should be interested in what we have to say on the subject?
Don't you think, if you have a choice between listening to a racist or a black person, you should probably listen to the black person? Or at the very least, not rudely dismiss what we have to say?
