Fragility Movement Takes Us Backwards
“Discussions are mutually and voluntarily engaged in and involve input from and consideration for all parties involved. This concept of white fragility is designed to secure one-way lectures, not discussions. The concept’s demeaning and racist terminology, systematic and self-referential dismissal of dissent, and contribution to the construction of a societal double bind in discussions of race and racism are only harmful to our society.” - Jesse Lile
Western Civilization rose to dominance during the age of enlightenment, during which freethinkers romanticized the notion of objective truth, human flourishing, and natural rights with which we are ALL endowed by our Creator. Philosophers of this era, wanted to improve the lives of the average person and ensure everyone had equal access to opportunity, regardless of the social class into which they were born.
Unfortunately, the painful truth of the promise of 1776 is that its implementation wasn’t perfect — far from it — and many were left behind on the basis of immutable characteristics outside of their control. However, it is important to recognize that the failure to properly implement that promise doesn't corrupt the promise itself. As stated so eloquently by historian Richard Beeman: “But however terrible the toll, [the Civil War] did resolve the paradox at the nation’s core: the existence of the institution of slavery in a nation that claimed to be devoted to liberty.”
As we discussed last week, it took the Civil Rights Movement of the 60s and 70s to move us closer to our ideal. It was a movement centered on love and seeking equality for disenfranchised populations while understanding that the ends cannot justify immoral means. It was a movement in stark contrast to the current social justice movement which seeks to pull one group of Americans out from their status as outcasts and immediately replace them with another.
Instead of Martin Luther King, Jr’s beautiful dream of a colorblind society, the new goal is “anti-racism,” a concept made popular by Robin DiAngelo’s White Fragility. This book, written by a privileged, white, tenured professor, has sparked a movement that has ironically led to the return of policies that scarily resemble Jim Crow, such as graduation ceremonies for specific racial groups and requiring that white people stay off campus for a “Day of Absence.”
DiAngelo’s thesis can be summed up by three of her quotes: 1) “Colorblind ideology allows society to deny the reality of racism in the face of its persistence while making it more difficult to challenge than when it was openly espoused.” 2) “White people raised in Western society are conditioned into a white supremacist worldview because it is the bedrock of our society and its institutions.” 3) “People of color may also hold prejudices and discriminate against white people, but they lack the social and institutional power that transforms their prejudice and discrimination into racism.”
Let’s unpack this. DiAngelo has essentially stated 1) overt acts of racism are preferable to unconscious, implicit social biases, 2) American culture cannot be separated from white supremacy, and 3) that people of color can “hold prejudices and discriminate” without being racist.
These aren’t the ramblings of a fringe activist; DiAngelo’s book was the eighth-most sold book on Amazon in 2020 and spent almost one hundred weeks on the New York Times Bestsellers list. These ideas are increasingly becoming more mainstream. People are so afraid of offending others that they are choosing political correctness over honesty.
There is such tremendous guilt for the actions of the flawed individuals that have come before us, that we fail to see the massive progress our society has made over the last fifty years. This is not to argue that there is not still progress to be made. Black Americans die at the hands of police more frequently than White Americans. Black men comprise a disproportionate number of incarcerated individuals in our criminal justice system.
These are real problems that we must address, but instead, society is setting aside timeless principles, and replacing them with subjective doctrines that are purposefully setting out to treat people differently based on immutable characteristics such as race, gender, and sexuality.
This is not progress. We cannot and we will not ever heal as the incredibly diverse nation we are if our solution to discrimination is more discrimination.
