I don't necessarily have a problem with BLM - nor do I have a problem with those people who seek to profit from it. That is human nature - one can profess to be a Marxist because such a thing is easy to do until someone gives you a cheque for a few hundred thousand dollars - and then suddenly you become a born again capitalist. Such is human nature and people almost always act in their own interest.
My position, and one I've taken for a long time, is that focussing the discussion around race can't solve the problem of racism. It doesn't work. All it does is highlight the differences and inflate existing racism on the one hand and race prejudice on the other. Plenty of BIPOC writers on this site have no vested interest in solving the problem of racism - they act as a defacto echo chamber megaphone - and quietly pocket the views. Everyone already knows white men are the root of all evil - what good does it do to play into such an existing bias? What solutions does it offer? Who is really benefiting from such an approach? The BIPOC people who think these things already, or the white middle-class liberals who think saying 'thanks... I thought this the whole time too' adds something meanginful to the conversation. It doesn't and they don't.
Racism is a very real problem that permeates every facet of the US experiment - but anti-racism isn't the solution. Socialism is the solution. When you make the US a more equitable and fair society your demos won't feel the need to blame each other for every slight transgression. Whilst BIPOC middle class rhetoricians make the case that all white people have more privillege than all black people - right wing demaogues can drive a truck straight through such an argument. It doesn't sit true with large swathes of the population. It might BE true, but such a truth is semantic. You can make the argument Oprah has less privilege than a drifter in Arkensas but you'll have a harder job proving it to the satisfaction of anyone outside a liberal bubble.
So whilst the left descends into identity based in-fighting and plays at who wins oppression bingo, the resultant shouty mess pushes moderates into the willing arms of Conservatism. This harms BIPOC disproportionately and whilst it may feel like progress to some, I'd argue that things are getting worse for many people. Arguably not for the affluent middle class BIPOC who have monetised their writing, their seminars and their social media leverage - but for race relations in the US in general. It's becoming a smaller and smaller bubble of liberals staying tuned in, whilst everyone else tunes out with damaging results. We couldn't feel further from the Obama administration era.
Last year on Medium you couldn't move for social justice - now there are a more sceptical group of writers emerging questioning the received wisdom of anti-racism and social justice. I would put myself and Steve QJ in that list. People whose work wouldn't have been curated a year ago becuase even the act of questioning anti-racism as a methodology was considered racist - but who now find ourselves in the cut and thrust of interesting dialogue with others. There is no hegemony on how the future should be any more and the Medium microphone is being handed to engaging arguments rather than the loudest clickiest arguments.
I don't want to throw anti-racism out entire. I would argue that Anti-racism is a valid path for individuals to take in their own time. To do the reading and to understand history and legal context, but I'd also argue it's not a valid path for a liberal society to try and mandate. You can't enforce tolerance, particularly not using the level of intolerance some think it should be policed with. In many cases our discussions are too immature. You end up with conversations about why Bridgerton is the epitome of racism or how soap dispensers at college have racial bias. You end up with every issue being 'offensive' (nobody ever died of being offended.) We end up in a society wide right-wing pissing contest between individual groups that stymies change rather than encourages any meaningful difference.
Genuine anti-racism is the ability to move past race entirely and to see skin colour as no more than an indicator of melanin levels. Anti-racism won't do this because it contains apriori assumptions about race at its core. It's the 'don't think about pink elephants' method writ large. To really combat racism we have to move all people past the subject of race. Such a utopic end point won't happen in our life time - but I'm hopeful if we can promote healthy discussion that encourages dialogue rather than shouting - people from all backgrounds will find common ground and will guide themselves towards a more compassionate society.
As always when I talk to people who favour anti-racism - I'd like to say, we're working towards the same end-point (the end of racism and the betterment of society), we just disagree about methodology. Loved the article, disagreed entirely - but that is neither here nor there. I look forward to reading more. :o)
