Toma, I agree completely that saying something along the line of "all white people actively work towards increasing oppression of minorities in America" is obviously false and unnecessarily alienating (and is also racist in it's own right). Somehow, though, I seriously doubt that that was the point the speaker in Kipp's story was making (even Malcolm X denounced that idea, saying once, ""I am not a racist.... In the past I permitted myself to be used...to make sweeping indictments of all white people, the entire white race and these generalizations have caused injuries to some whites who perhaps did not deserve to be hurt. Because of the spiritual enlightenment which I was blessed to receive as a result of my recent pilgrimage to the Holy city of Mecca, I no longer subscribe to sweeping indictments of any one race."). This is all probably moot since no one but Kipp knows exactly what the speaker was saying, but since it was in a speech at the multicultural center at Berkeley, my guess is that it was probably something closer to what you and I agree on, namely that acknowledging white privilege is a crucial component of any discussion regarding class stratification. I guess my point is that I agree with what you're saying, but that is quite far from agreeing with what was originally said. Kipp can go ahead and correct me if I'm wrong though.

Meagan, I agree that we all play a part in reinforcing stereotypes. There was an argument in my criminal law casebook, when discussing the connection between police discretion and racism, that the fact that more black people are now members of the police force does not mean that there will no longer be racist police discretion, because studies indicate that many black members of the force also racially profile people. Sure, point granted. But the problem of otherizing discussed earlier does not stem from the critic distinguishing white complicity with the complicity of minorities; it was rather discussed in connection with when a minority speaker criticizes "whiteness" as a foundation for class stratification, that somehow the association of class stratification with a race alienated those people of that race (paraphrasing Kipp, "why not say what it is?" IE class, not race). And my point was that the association of class stratification with a race is inevitable and necessary when that relation is grounded in fact. In the end I don't think we're disagreeing on anything, I think we're just making different points.

Cheers, Prashant

-- PrashantRai - 11 Apr 2012