Categories
Student Posts

Blog 11/30 Class

Overall, I have learned a lot from this course. Coming into this course, I was not sure what to expect. However, I think that my main takeaway is that discovering the Truth can be difficult, although it is important. This can be applied to my everyday life by not being afraid to question positions that people have if I am confused or disagree. Providing evidence either through lived experiences or information sources is important to back the Truth that you are promoting. I think that this concept was very much in practice during this course. There were debates, however engaging critically is something that this university veers away from. This is interesting as higher education is supposed to cultivate an education that promotes critical thinking and debate. This was one of the only courses that I have taken at Bucknell that encouraged looking at both sides of an argument to discover which one was writing about a particular agenda and which one was attempting to push the truth.

Categories
Class Minutes

Class notes

The articles from this week’s discussion came from Bucknell’s Antiracism page and showcases how our own university deals with wokeism. There are two main aspects to woeksim that we tackled this week which include racism and the power of language. 

In the article “10 Ways to Tackle Linguistic Bias in Our Classrooms”  it addresses the prejudices that minority students face when they read and write in the classroom. This article is effective at tying together both racism and the power of language in through a wokeist perspective. We went on to talk about how our goal should be to listen to as many different voices and perspectives as possible. Yet this is very challenging to implement realistically in a society with multicultural beliefs. It is virtually impossible to get everyone to agree upon one thing and having so many competing viewpoints can lead to chaos and hinder our baility to successfully communicate with one another. 

Language can be used to unite society, but at the same time it can deepen divisions between social groups and even lead to violence. This made us think about: How can langugae have pyscholgical effects/harm on people? Should we limit our free speech to spare the feelings of others? This relates to our discussion with Gad Saad and seeking the truth. He argues that we should find the truth through the scientific method and incorporate evidence and facts into our language to support our arguments. There are wokesits that make factual claims which makes it more difficult to critique their arguments sucecsffuly. This directly contradicts spiritual relgions such as Christiianity which base their beliefs on faith vocabulary. They accept moral truths with no empirical evidence or science whatsoever. This leaves spiral religions more open to criticism that quasi-relgiions because they do not have data to base their claims on. 

The interpretation of language from Christians and Wokeists also relates to our discussions of truth relativism. According to Christians there is a mystical fact that informs them of what happened in the universse and what comes after that. They accept moral truths that comes from language in the Old Testament rather than the language of fact. Their viewpoints come from a faith program rather than an experiment. Wokeists on the other hand have their own language for looking at social justice issues.

The main social justice issue that we covered was the American social problem with police violence aagainst young black men. Kendi’s “Who Gets to Be Afriad in America?” covers the case of an unarmed black man, Arbery, who was fatally shot by two white men. The white men claim in their defense that they thought he was guilty of robbing the neighborhood and tried to detain him but he grabbed their gun. Yet it was a controversial case and the verdict found the white men guilty of murder and a hate crime. Kendi argues that  white supremacists are  inherent to american society and the result of such hate crimes is because of structural racism. We discussed the issues of making such a claim such as: how do you know the structure is the only thing producing the injustice? What is the social structure and how is it perpetuating this social injustice? We concluded that there needs to be support with scientific evidence to suppor tthi claim, but it is challenging to do with other confounding variables that cause hate crimes. If the only cause is structural racism then that would warrant that nothing else conceiveably could be going on to perpeturate these issues. Currently our social sciences are not developed enough because our tools are not sophisticated enough to fully understand or assign solutions to certain social justice issues like racism and hate crimes. Some issues are so complicated in human nature that we will never be able to sort out how much of each cause is producing each effect.

Additionally another common theme that came up during our conversation was police brutality against young black men. There are cases in whcih the driver is resistant or not compliant to the police’s orders which escalation points. Yet we must ask ourselves: are these police using self defense or unecessary violence? Somebl people would argue that black men are disproriotnately targeted by police officers which is an example of instiutionalized racism within the police system. This relates to Kendi’s claim that America is fundamentally a white supremacist nation. He claims that racism is still very much widespread today. Even though we do not have Jim Crow laws, racism in today’s society has become more insidious. He goes as far as to claim that the election of the first black president was evidence of how insidious racism has gotten because we have become so used to internalized racism. The fact that we had a black president to him was not a milestone in combating racism in America. Overall, a lot of the calims that Kendi make seem to falsifiable and open to critique due to his lack of evidencei n support of his argument. 

Overall our discussion of the power of language and racism can help us understand how wokeists approach such issues. They advocate for change and express frustration with the current and past administrations in America. Yet, the only way to make such arguments non-falsiafiable is to know the scientific facts and utilize empirical evidence in order to claim validity to the arguments that you are making. 

Categories
Student Posts

Blog 12

After our last discussion of white culture and white supremacy culture, I found that there is much to unfold here. For example, as we brought up in class, many of the primary pieces that are available on the Bucknell Anti-racism page never define the terms “culture” or “white supremacy” and what that means in the context in which they are speaking. Nor do these writers attempt to define these terms or provide any evidence for their argument. They provided many characteristics of all cultures and of defining entities of culture itself, such as deciding what is normal, deciding what is proper behavior and what is not. As this was discussed in class, it became clear to me that the idea of preconceived notions plays a role here. Some gathered that it would be beneficial to switch out certain words to fit the narrative in which they thought the author was attempting to portray. Yet switching the words would not change the general argument that the writer was making. Instead of “white culture” change the phraseology to “white American culture” or “white American society”. I think this could run us down a slippery slope in marginalizing a group of people that simply exist in society. Those who claim that white Americans marginalize and discriminate against minority groups are doing that very thing to whites. This in itself is racist against white people. Allow me to define the term racism here for reference. According to Merriam Webster dictionary, the term racism is defined as “a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race”. The same criticism of white Americans could be turned onto any other racial group who believes that ALL white Americans are responsible for the marginalization and discrimination of a particular race. As we stated in class, it is extremely complex and obviously there are exceptions but generalizations are what lead us to the era of wokeist agendas being propagated.

Another important point I found interesting is that it is mostly white people bringing up this idea of white privilege and supremacy. I found this especially virtuous and almost martyrdom like in the podcast “Betray White Fathers” where they give actions that need to be taken of white people ASAP. They write “If things get confrontational with the police, you are there to de-arrest people and put your body between Black people and the police.” Why is it a white person’s responsibility to put his or herself in harm’s way to protect black people that may very well be committing a crime? Almost as though it’s a martyrdom for their “faith” or as reparations for those black people.

To finish this blog post I’d like to say what I took away from this course. After taking this class, it is clear that the quasi-religion aspect of the wokeist agenda is the basis for why much of this rhetoric is spread so successfully. These ideas are highly geared toward young impressionable students who are looking for something to believe in and act for. As a young student, one of the most important things I took away was to ask questions about things and to not be afraid to ask questions. Do not simply allow others to tell you what the truth is but go out and seek it for yourself.

Categories
Student Posts

Blog post week of 11/30

In the Betray white fathers podcast, Phoebe talks about white supremacy and finds out that its taking place so close to her hometown. Personally, i found that part interesting because the town of Quindaro is a part of history but it seems that the way that society works and because it revolves around whiteness that its actually trying to erase it. Quindaro is an abolitionist town. The town was an outlier because it was a place where whites, native Americans and freed African Americans could all live together in peace. Because of the way our society operates, the town id “hidden” since they don’t want people to actually find out that other individuals actually lived like this and supported those ideas. 

When Phoebe says that john browns narrative is changed, he is marked as crazy because what he believed in was not considered the norm of society and it needed to fit in with what other white individuals believe in. This idea reminded me of some of the other readings we did, more specifically, Peter woods work and the 1619 project. In general, i feel that this story speaks for itself, since history about the town is not taught in schools even though it was so close to where she grew up. 

Another connection that i found between this article and the White Culture description is in part 3. The one that says white culture assigns a higher value to some ways of behaving then others. Then those other behaviors are considered dangerous or deviant. This reminds me of the good/bad binary for some reason because it has to do with one’s behavior (one good and one bad in terms of racist or not racists), almost like living by unwritten rules in order to navigate society.

I can relate more to the calling out ableism piece since I do have a chronic illness that is not noticeable. Originally, I was not sure why this was included but it makes sense that it was since it is discrimination against a specific group based on disability status. Replace disability status with the word race and we can see how similar they are.

Before even reading this article on White Fragility, what i first thought of was that its hard to talk to white people about racism because most think they aren’t racist or do not recognize their role in it. On the anthropological side of things, we created racism. The racial hierarchy keeps getting recreated as the interests of whites then become the foundation of our society. This article puts an emphasis on group power relations in order to understand how racism functions. 

I liked that the author listed the patterns. and explained in detail how they contribute to the difficulty of white people to understand racism as a system and how that then leads to white fragility. In one of those patterns, the one on whites being more valuable, that I think related back to the other reading/podcast on Bretaying white fathers since, like how a town of mixed races (white, native American and black) is forgotten.  It is also left out of history books and not taught in schools because it does not conform to the society that white supremacy is rooted in. Colored people are left out in many ways, while white people are the main center of attention and focus (just look at the list in the article). 

Categories
Student Posts

Blog Post – White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack

This article was extremely interesting to read. The author discusses her experience with White privilege, and how she came to understand what having White privilege meant. She discusses how she believes that it should be discussed and taught more in schools, and that it is just as important as having discussions and learning about racism. There is clearly privilege and oppression in every society today, whether that has to do with race, class, gender, etc. It is important to acknowledge how people play roles in today’s society in order to correct some of the historical wrongdoings that have occurred. I do not believe this means dropping everything to “save,” or “fix,” these wrongdoings. I do not believe this means that every society is doomed due to the privilege and oppression that exists. I just believe that through doing your part, even just by acknowledging how you play a role, you can make more strides than you realize to redesign social systems. Something interesting about this topic is how much emotion and personal connections have to do with it. There is a lot of personal connection that has to do with privilege and oppression. People everyday will feel and understand their privilege and oppression in different ways, whether they decide to acknowledge it or not. This makes the topic very difficult, and I think that Peggy McIntosh does a great job of explaining why it is important to acknowledge White privilege in a way that keeps the argument academic.

When reading this, I began to wonder how this connects to the intellectual class and wokeism. We have been discussing how the intellectual class is able to speak and be immediately listened to. Frequently, we have seen that they are listened to without research to define if their statements are correct. They are viewed as correct just because of their status as an intellectual. Therefore, this is a privilege that can place harm on others. Other people who are not included in the intellectual class can develop morals or beliefs based on members of the intellectual class and what they have decided to speak on. Through listening and absorbing information that members of the intellectual class publish and not questioning how correct the information is, other people suffer consequences. We have seen how misinformation can affect people, and how wokeism can lead to harm. This is a perfect example of that.

Categories
Student Posts

11/16 blog post

In this week’s reading Who Gets to be Afraid in America? I found this article very interesting and quite frankly emotional. It became hard to read this piece from an academic perspective and not bring in my personal experiences and feelings about the subject matter. Being a black woman and remembering my own reaction when Ahmaud Arbery was killed in 2020 reading this article brought up feelings that I forgot that I had. But these forgotten feelings are ones that I know well, I do not think of this article as a wokeist agenda but rather a lived reality of many black Americans. Throughout my time in this course, I have learned and explored viewpoints and academic tools that might not align with my own but have still tried to understand them and see their point of view, but when looking at this article in relation to the course I am struggling to understand the connection to the intellectual class. Is the connection between the author and how they fit into the intellectual class or the subject matter that they are writing about? After reading this piece I went back to the syllabus to see where it fit into that and when I saw that the author was a professor at BU I thought that the connection could be because our two schools are very similar in style of teaching. Anyone can correct me if I am wrong or blinded by personal feelings and emotions but I did not find that this article was pushing the author’s viewpoint into an academic setting as I viewed it as an opinion piece and not something that was intended to be used as an academic tool. 

When tying back to the title of the article, I think that anyone can be afraid in America based on any social identifiers but from a sociological perspective, functionalism works best here to see how functions and conversely dysfunction that are a result of racism. From a functionalist point of view, the death of Ahmaud Arbery is part of a system of modern racism that functions to allow a dominant group to hold power over another resulting in the death of the subordinate racial group. 

A few questions that I have in relation to this article:

Is there a case in which people who are in a dominant group, not just related to race, truly feel afraid in America? Or is this just a feeling for ones who are in a minority?

“When white men murder men like me, they call it self-defense. And they are believed. When men like me defend ourselves against violent white men, they call us the aggressors. And they are believed.” In relation to this quote from the article, does the language that we use to describe others and stereotypical ideas of them perpetuate acts of violence?

Categories
Student Posts

11/30 Blog post

In this week’s reading White Fragility, the patterns that are laid out about why it is difficult for white people to understand racism as a system and in terms of lead to white fragility are ones that I wanted to look at further. One of the patterns that I found the most interesting was individualism. The concept is that white people are taught to look at themselves as individuals and not as a racial group hence why it becomes easier to deny that racism is a system. When racism becomes an individual problem the conversation then shifts to the rhetoric of “well I am different, I am not racist” rather than understanding that racism is not a micro problem it is a macro issue. I do not think that the author is trying to state that every white person feels like this or that they should take responsibility for the actions of other white people. Still, I do think that the further white people move away from individualism and understand the past actions of the white race, and know that these actions have shaped our society today. Often times people are very quick to defend themselves in times when they are called out for a racist act and this goes into the notion of white fragility and how with forms of discomfort involving race there is a pushback from people who have white fragility.

Another reading that I wanted to note is Call Out Ableism. I think this project is very important for people to understand and self-reflect on. The dictionary part of the website was one that I found interesting I have not heard of some of the terms before and being able to read them to make sure that I can do what I can to be an ally for this community is important to me. I think that now more than ever people are more aware of being ableist and what they say especially when not politically correct. But there are still people who use these derogatory terms quite often, on Bucknell’s campus I hear people say these terms shamelessly every day in a sense of malintent and as a joke, but nevertheless, it is a problem. Being an ableist is something that I do not understand, if someone has a disability whether visible or not it is not something that anyone else has the right to speak on, make fun of, or take advantage of. Ableism is like any other ism (in a slang sense) that is an oppressive discriminatory attitude or belief. Often times people who have disabilities are left out of marginalized groups and their struggles may not be seen as valid as something like racism or sexism. This project brings awareness to that and provides a source of education and also allows people in this community to speak their truth and regain power in this relationship with ableists.

Categories
Student Posts

Week 13 Blog

On the university’s resource page, 

Too many people whose expertise are not in the social sciences are making too many false statements on society and its structures.

Arguments should not harm people. If people are harmed by arguments, then it is probably a sign that the person hearing it is not in good shape mentally.

Wokeism, to me, is like the tradition of making factual claims that are actually faith claims. They either assume what they are claiming is true beforehand or not care to dig deep enough into the evidence.

It is extremely hard to understand society and find “truth” about it.

The real intellectual way is to not assume anything and withhold judgments or claims, until one has gone through enough rigorous research and being confident in one’s understanding of the topic.

Categories
Book Reviews

American Awakening: Identity Politics and Other Afflictions of Our Time

For my book review I will be analyzing Joshua Mitchell’s book American Awakening: Identity Politics and Other Afflictions of Our Time. There are three major themes to this book that Mitchell believes prevent Americans from the concept of working together toward a common world. Identity politics, bipolarity and addictions are concepts that are plaguing American society. This book addresses a public crisis with identity politics as well as private affairs with the other two ideas.  The purpose of this review is to analyze and critique the argument as well as solutions that Mitchell makes throughout this novel. 

In part one Mitchell defines identity and then how this transpires in reality. Identity is a relatively modern concept as it was first introduced in the 1990s. Today identity is shaped as one type becomes an offending transgressor while the other is viewed as an innocent victim. The attachments to these identities extend beyond the moment as they are considered permanent, regardless if the individual contributed to transgression. The concept of identity politics can be considered a quasi-religion as the individual stands for the related transgression. Transgressor and innocents are a concept drawn from Chirstianity. Religion has not decreased within America, but has moved into the framework of identity politics. 

Identity politics departs from the liberal idea of citizens building a community. Within the liberal framework, individuals do not work in the nature of self-interest, by alongside fellow citizens to build a community. This task seems difficult, as Mitchell believes that we are satisfied with the categories that we have placed ourselves into and the cost of undoing it is too high. Mitchell’s reasoning to move away from identity politics in order to unify seems reasonable. However, a critique of removing self-interest appears to be a fine line. The idea of an individual is not to become a robot of the state. I think that self-interest cannot completely disappear as this is what creates personality. 

Another critique that I have of Mitchell’s idea of a liberal citizen is how it needs to be cultivated. In order to reach this point, frequent, real time conversations need to occur, otherwise a false depiction of others will grow during time spent apart. Social media and other forms of telecommunication are large barriers preventing the liberal citizen from emerging. A starting point to cultivate a citizen would be through education. This type of environment could foster the conversations needed that social media cannot replicate. Since social media is largely used as an escape from reality, it would need to be completely restructured to achieve Mitchell’s desired effect. The idea of a broken link is brought up in the section about the bipolarity experienced today. 

The concept of bipolarity can be traced back to the transition from the aristocracy into the democratic age. In an aristocratic society each individual serves a role to another individual in order for the government to function, which links everyone together. However, democracy breaks this link. With the newfound freedom, a democratic man believes that he can save Earth and not God. Although, constraining forces of democracy overwhelm, and they renounce freedom altogether. Therefore, it is the combination of feeling so powerful that you do not need others, yet also feeling powerless that we do not turn to others to work together. This dichotomy can be difficult to escape given the issues prevalent in politics today. These issues are approaching with opposing views that each side becomes obsessed with “winning” over fixing it. I think that this obsession translates into Mitchell’s idea of addiction that ailing American society. 

Mitchell believes that the cause of addiction occurs when the supplement becomes the substitute. He relates this to plastic water bottles and fast food chains that are plaguing society. These are temporary concepts that we have relied on for too long as they now have a large presence. The idea of supplements can be applied to the federal government as it is expanding, the problems grow worse and the political parties are in opposition to each other. Mitchell calls on the everyday citizens to heal this wound. This seems ironic as in the previous section on bipolarity, he believes that the world continuously falls short, therefore activism is episodic. Thus, causes humans to oscillate between feeling greater than a king or less than man. It seems that Mitchell wants to establish that humans must first rid the bipolarity of feelings to eliminate living on “borrowed time.”

In the conclusion, Mitchell takes on the philosophical framework of Rousseau. Rousseau wanted to have a civilization which resembled one of the state of nature. He believed that the resulting forces of badly designed societies have resulted in humans being selfish. Mitchell stated the combination of technology and industry have disrupted nature. In order to move forward they need to be removed. This is achieved through rejected Western ideas and its privilege. Although this concept is beneficial to improve reason, I think it fails to recognize the limitations it places on society. I believe that to a certain extent technological advancements are helpful. However, I think the rise of social media can contribute to disruptions that Mitchell is referring to. Information is much more accessible compared to the past and can spread unchecked. I disagree that technology and industry have to become obsolete. Removing these concepts would prove rather difficult given the interdependence on technology globally. Thus, they should be reformed in order to add value to human reason. 

Throughout Mitchell’s book he argues that liberalism, in its original meaning, would be more beneficial for American society. He argues for liberalism by explaining the ailments of identity politics, bipolarity, and addiction. The examples ailments provided are not new problems that we face today. Rather, the roots of these “diseases” are based in Christianity, and in current times take a new form. In Mitchell’s conclusion, he discusses a solution to achieve the liberal competence. He states that  renewing the middle-class republic as our country was established is the starting point. Two other problems that need to be fixed are reframing the wound of slavery, and restructuring America’s foreign policy. Mitchell is hopeful for the future if citizens are able put in the necessary and difficult labor. Within this future that Mitchell envisions would require that Americans unify and put together their differences, which seems difficult with the polarizing nature of politics in recent years. Society would have to abandon this quasi-religion of identity politics. 

Categories
Book Reviews

Book Review of American Awakening: Identity Politics and Other Afflictions of Our Time

For this book review, I will be analyzing Joshua Mitchell’s American Awakening: Identity Politics and Other Afflictions of Our Time. In this book, Mitchell points out Identity Politics as the key threat to American society today, and, bipolarity and addiction are the two main causes behind the emergence of identity politics. Mitchell claims that identity politics is problematic because it is an unhealthy form of management of the society that will lead to conflict between members within one society. The solution he proposes to the problem of identity politics — and what he believes to be the optimal way societies are managed in America — is “liberal politics of competence.”

To start, Mitchell gives a short introduction on the religious history of western societies and the notion of “spiritual economy.” While Christianity declined in western societies — According to recent surveys by Pew Research, it seems that America is declining in its religiosity — there are certain things that persisted. Mitchell believes that western societies, especially America, have a persistent fixation on the spiritual economy, which focuses on guilt vs. innocence. The notion of spiritual economy was part of the essence of Christianity, yet a deformed understanding of it. In Christianity, people deal with their imperfections by accepting the existence of a scapegoat, Christ, who sacrificed himself for the sin, imperfection, and guilt of all people on Earth. Yet, identity politics revolves around constant “scapegoating.” Through identifying certain innocent groups of the society, the corresponding transgressors are also identified. So if one was being a faithful Christian, he or she would be assessed by God once he or she dies; they would be granted a spot in heaven if they had lived a good life, or a spot in hell if they lived a bad life. Thus, the accounting of sin and guilt occurs in another world, after life. However, identity politics try to get even fully in this life.

Aside from how difficult it will be to truly calculate the debt, for example, if there were reparations made to the black Americans by white Americans, “how much each individual will pay and in what form,” their attempt resembles similar attempts in progressivism, communism, the new left movements, and other intellectual-led movements. A utopian world is the goal of all these movements, yet this is not realistically possible on Earth. In this aspect, identity politics is a form of quasi-religion that also tries to bring an utopia to Earth, one where all transgressions have been accounted for — a guilt-free world. Moreover, identity politics’s attempt is also self-contradictory: they hold the belief that groups ought to be unities and they wish to give voice to those who don’t have a voice, yet, in this process the transgressors aren’t being treated in the same fashion. So we see how this is similar to the new left student movements in Berkeley, where the students had called for freedom of speech and expression, but they also made efforts to silence and fight against those who held ideas different from theirs.

However, the issue is that scapegoating does not solve the problem, as the transgressor is not always the real source of the problems. The transgressor might be one party that is involved, and a sinned one, but it doesn’t mean that the transgression can be attributed entirely to the transgressor. This is the idea of addiction — attempting to alleviate the symptoms rather than curing the problem. For identity politics, purging the scapegoat is a way to relieve the pressure and discharge the guilt. The scapegoat can be an innocent person, or it can be a system or an institution, such as the church or the government. For example, Lincoln issuing the Emancipation Proclamation alone did not solve the problem of slavery during civil war; nor did anti-racism and anti-discrimination acts solve the racial conflicts in America.

Mitchell claims that addiction worsens the problem of identity politics as people seek to give up their own responsibility in constructing a society that is healthy. In this process, people become less involved in the community that is around them. An example given in the book was about bottled water. Because of the poor water quality of the tap water, people turn to buying bottled water. Yet, they could have gone to do various things like replacing pipes or reporting to certain agencies so they get clean tap water again. In some sense, they are also choosing the easiest way for themselves, that is at the same time an unhealthy way for society to deal with this issue. The same logic can be observed in identity politics: instead of figuring out the problems by talking and debating with other people in the society, a lot of people believe in the “management society.” I find this argument similar to Gad Saad’s argument about trigger warnings, which serve as tools to prevent people from getting hurt. In this case, the warning is merely a form of palliative that allows people to be free from potential pain momentarily. However, to really prevent people from getting hurt, one and for all, we should encourage people to grow stronger mentally, so that they are prepared for whatever encounters and not get hurt from them.

Mitchell also addresses the issue of bipolarity within American society and how it contributes to the rise of identity politics. He argues that American society has been plagued by a bipolarity that is rooted in its history and that has been exacerbated by the decline of communities. This bipolarity is manifested in the way that Americans view themselves and others, and it is characterized by an mentality in a way similar to manic depression or bipolar disorder. Because of weakened social connections between people, on one hand, the selfish man feel invincible; on the other hand, he feels powerless. This bipolarity is reflected in the way that Americans approach issues such as race, gender, and sexuality, and it is a key factor behind the rise of identity politics.

In summary, Joshua Mitchell explains that the spiritual economy, as a deformed heritage of Christianity, constructs the core of today’s identity politics. Moreover, what Mitchell identifies as bipolarity and addiction are obstacles that also must be tackled before the society can be healthy again. In his analysis of identity politics, I was also to draw several connections between the book and things we have studied in class. I also see how studying the intellectual class helps us better understand wokeism, or identity politics, in American society today.