SIO247: Reflections on White Fragility and How To Be An Antiracist

Transcript

This transcript was generated automatically and may contain errors — the audio is the record.

0:00:29 Thomas: Hello, and welcome to Serious Inquiries Only. This is episode 247. I'm Thomas Smith, and I'm by myself today. Uh, quick note, um, Jamie is not here, and, uh, I just wanted to say stuff that she's already mentioned, and if you follow her on social media, I'm sure you've seen, so I don't think I'm speaking out of turn or anything. Jamie is a single mother and not only that, a widowed single mother at a time of pandemic with school age children. I don't know how she even does it at all. I can't imagine how difficult that must be. So things are probably going to be a bit slower for Jamie. She's going to try to pick her spots when maybe she can do the show, but I'm absolutely putting no pressure on her because Because I can only imagine.

0:01:19 Thomas: I mean, it's tough for all of us, of course, but geez, it must be even harder with with all those things going on. So that's what's going on with Jamie. She's, you know, absolutely welcome anytime she feels up to it. And we'll all be very excited to have her back. But for now, just wanted to do a solo show here. And I wanted to reflect a bit on a couple books that I've read. I read White Fragility actually a while back when it first came out, I think. And then I just recently read How to Be an Anti-Racist, which you heard if you listen to Alex Jules, that episode, a few episodes back, you heard him recommend that. I had already read Stamped from the Beginning by Ibram Kendi, but I hadn't yet checked this one out.

0:02:06 Thomas: And I absolutely wanted to based on Alex's recommendation, and it did not disappoint. It was a great book. So I wanted to talk about that. I kind of wanted to reflect a bit on race and as a white person trying to grapple with these issues. And, and I want to say from the outset that, you know, if, if you're a black listener and you're thinking, I don't want to hear another white guy railing on about race. That's okay if you want to split, you know, just kind of kind of skip this one, I guess. No, no, no offense taken, no harm done. But on the other hand, it's I'm kind of between a lot of, I guess, intuitions here and a lot of constraints for one, you know, I do want to have people on here, people of color to to give their views.

0:02:53 Thomas: Than I have. And I want to continue to do a better job of that. But I also, you know, there's, there's a lot of quotes that I'm seeing lately that I can't remember where it originated from. But, you know, racism is not a black people problem. Racism is a white people problem, and white people need to figure it out. You know, we need to find out how to fix it. Um, you know, so, so it's, there's a lot, you know, there's a lot of competing problems and and issues, but I don't know, I thought maybe this would be helpful if, if, if you're, uh, you know, why, just a plain old white person like me, and you think, I don't know what's going on, or I, or I find some of these issues confusing, or, or maybe I'm not on board with, with some things lately, I don't know, maybe, maybe my process will help. I don't, don't know.

0:03:43 Thomas: That's, that's what I'm going for here. So I thought I'd take a stab at it and see if this, this episode can help anyone along the way. So speaking of finding these narrow paths to tread on in conversation, White Fragility by Robin DiAngelo, who, if you don't know, is white. Uh, this is written by a white woman. Um, of course, Ibram Kendi is a black man. So, um, coming from from different perspectives there in writing these books that both, both of which, by the way, have taken off in popularity, uh, among others, uh. In the light of all of the protests and Black Lives Matter and all, all the current moments. So, and I think that's a good thing. But I wanted to say this. This is, this is an interesting kind of territory to tread on because I read White Fragility and I really liked probably 80% of it.

0:04:36 Thomas: And I thought, uh... it's very valuable. Uh... It certainly led me to challenge a lot of things that I was already working on, you know, more, even more ways of seeing how, I think one of the biggest messages of white fragility and a lot other work around this issue is when you're white in America, how much you can just ignore race. You are able to just ignore a race and, and furthermore, especially among conservatives, but, you know, white people largely, even white, you know, progressives or liberals think it's they think it's wrong if you even look at race. Like there was, of course, in the 90s and into the 2000s, I think the view was like, no, we got to be race blind. We can't even can't talk about it.

0:05:22 Thomas: That's the solution. We don't talk about it. And I think if you take it at its best value, perhaps if you, if you want to give full credit to it, or as much as you can, I think the idea was, well, in the 60s, and this is a very naive conception of it, you know, in times past, people were hateful toward black people, and it's that focus on their race that caused the problem. So therefore, what we need to do is not focus on anyone's race and try to treat everybody as though they are some sort of raceless alien or something. And there are obvious problems with that. I want to point out, though, that, as I'm sure most people listening will remember, because I'm only 30-something, and I remember that was looked at as like a great idea by probably mainly white people, which is like, yeah, no, that's perfect.

0:06:14 Thomas: That's perfect way to fix it. We'll ignore race. Nobody's any race. And now I think more and more everybody sees the problem with that, I hope. I mean, it's, it's been a process, though. I certainly didn't see the problem with it when I was younger, and particularly when I was more of a centrist coming out of a conservative upbringing. I thought that was the answer. I thought, yeah, you know, it's let's just move on. Let's move, we fixed, racism is done, we had all the thing. You know, there's a great tweet that I thought was so accurate, that, like, the way history is taught in this country, and it certainly was for me, was, it was kind of, a it was obviously for, for comedic effect, but I think it was really spot on. There were a bunch of racists. Then Martin Luther King Jr. came, and the Civil Rights Bill solved all racism.

0:06:59 Thomas: But then one last racist killed Martin Luther King. And then we locked that guy up or whatever happened to him. And then it was all fixed. Like that's the way it's kind of taught. And I thought that really captured the way I think a lot of white people have wanted to think about this. Um, they've wanted to think about it as though this is in the past. This is something that's fixed. It's all done. And I want to go a step further because there's also a way that I've started to learn to think about race, you know, of course, as a result of reading and talking to, you know, non-white people and actually learning more about it, that I think in addition to the focus on colorblindness, which I think we've seen just does not work.

0:07:44 Thomas: And I can go more into that. It's hard to know where everybody is. You know, I know I know everybody's not in the same place on any given issue. So maybe everybody's already way past that phase of thinking about race, you know, if you're white and maybe you're not. But that doesn't work. Race blind policies do not fix anything. And furthermore, I think the best analogy that I've I thought of, but I heard someone else use just recently. So I guess, you Know, I'm sure it's it's must be a common way of thinking about it, but, um, there wasn't actually a time where we fixed racism. There wasn't actually a Time where we made things equal. And I don't want to go into a, a big poorly done history lesson, but when people on the right want to say, Hey, racism, sorry, racism slavery was come on.

0:08:34 Thomas: That's 150 years ago. It's getting on a hundred, and I guess 60-ish now. Come on, it's, it's enough time, it's over, you know? Um, and that's a really naive way of looking at it, and that's certainly a way, as a, again, as a conservative as a kid, that's how kind of how I thought of it. Like, how could people still be complaining about something that took place long before anyone I knew was alive? Um, and I think that's very common way white people try to dodge this. And, uh, the way I think about it is, if we were to pay reparations, which I think we, we absolutely should do, for me, it really wouldn't even, in my opinion, slavery wouldn't necessarily even be the top reason to pay reparations.

0:09:20 Thomas: It's obviously a good reason, and it's, don't get me wrong, it is in the reasons. It is a very good reason to pay reparation. We should have paid reparations, we can still, but it's the stuff that happened and after that is not, in my opinion, taught very well in school, and that I did not learn about for the longest time. It's not just about slavery. It is about reconstruction. It is about the absolute failure of reconstruction. The weirdest thing that I have learned about our United States history is that one of the best times, or I guess, I do not know how to put this, but, but the years, maybe the decade or so immediately after slavery, was way better than the, like, 50 years after that, because there was an attempt at reconstruction, and some things, there are all kinds of, there are black politicians who were able to be elected.

0:10:16 Thomas: There are all kind of good things that happened, in progress that was being made. And then a bunch of angry white people really were not happy with that and just absolutely gutted what was happening and the progress that was being made, and made things far worse for the next, like, 50, 60, however many years, I've seen my math, 70, 80, I don't know, after that, and made it far worse.

And so getting back to the analogy I was going to bring up, I think of it like a game of Monopoly. I know that might sound childish, but that's kind of how I thinkof it, where, if we think about it, very roughly speaking, the situation as a Monopoly board, board, because honestly, in some ways, this, this country, and, and the colonialism and the settling that happened, and the, um, awful imperialism that happened, of course, and the taking of land from Native Americans and all that As far as white Americans were concerned, it was a bit like a Monopoly board, you know, it was a bit like, oh, here's all this uninhabited land, yeah sure there's native people, but we don't count them, here's all this new land that we get, uh, how do we divvy it up? Well, um, among white people, essentially. And there were all kinds of ways that white people were able to gain access to land, to property, to things that build generational wealth that black people were simply denied for decades.

Absolutely denied. So it's as though we're playing a game of Monopoly and we allow mostly just about only white people to own any of the property for the most part. And, of course, you have your counterexamples, and conservatives love to hold up successful black people as countereximples and say, look, that person did it.

0:11:58 Thomas: Why can't every other black person do it? And this is something that I don't know how much I held that view, but I remember, especially back when I was like, you know, 10 years ago when I'd listen to Adam Carolla, because I used to think he was funny, but he eventually got too conservative. I just couldn't do it anymore because it was so short-sighted. But he used to bring this up all the time. Oh, the top earning athlete is black. Oh, Oprah is one of the top earners in the country. She's black. At the time the president was Barack Obama. He's black so how could anyone complain? How could any black person complain? Look at those examples and it's pretty basic arithmetic I think to point out that if you take the extreme examples, sure there are going to be outliers. There are going to be very exceptional people of any race.

0:12:48 Thomas: And if you only look at them, but then refuse to look at the fact that black wealth on average is just a fraction of what white wealth is, then you can kind of be blind to that. And furthermore, it gets even worse because what you can do and what a lot of conservatives do is say, yeah, okay, look at these examples of successful, wealthy black people. That means anything is possible. And then therefore, when you look at the rest of the numbers and see that the median wealth of a black family is just a tenth, I believe, is last I heard. You hear different numbers. Maybe it could be depending on different, you know, dividing up the country differently. But I think on the whole, and specifically, I know in certain cities, it's it's god awful. It's even worse.

0:13:34 Thomas: But I believe last that I saw on the whole black wealth was black family wealth, median family wealth was about a tenth of what white median family wealth is to say nothing of also the income gap, which is which is also bad. But I think those are both important numbers because income is, you know, obviously in the short term is an interesting and good comparison and you'd want to close that gap. But the wealth gap makes it even harder to close some other gaps because wealth is what what you use to, you know, build long-term success, to be able to afford a medical bill, to be able to buy a house and generate moral wealth, all these things that just get harder and harder if you don't have it. So, anyway, then people like Adam Carolla and people like, you know among that ilk that look at this problem and say, okay, look at Oprah, look at Obama, look all these big examples of successful black people.

0:14:23 Thomas: So that means, therefore, anything is possible, and no black person can be held back, because, look, they look at the heights, heights they've attained, and then when they look at the numbers and see, like, how unequal and and how poorly, um, the, the average black family is doing in this country compared to the average white family, they say, well, then there must be something wrong with them. And that's, that's the, the, the worst part of it, is to say, oh, that's their fault, there's something wrong with them, when in reality, I think it goes back to, uh, the Monopoly comparison that I that I've been pointing out, like, sure, over time, you have had some very successful black people who, hey, maybe they got a square on that Monopoly board. And so people say, look, what we need now, we realize in the, in the 60s, we fixed it.

0:15:11 Thomas: Again, they think we fixed it in the 70s. We fixed the Civil Rights Act. Everyone is treated the same. So therefore, let's get on this monopoly board and give no one any special rules. You know, when a white person rolls the dice, I assume everyone's familiar with Monopoly. If you land on a property and it's yours, great. If it's someone else's, you know, you got to pay a few bucks, however that works. You have to pay rent. But we're all playing by the same rules. White, black, whatever the race, you're playing by the same rules and honestly, I think the comparison works pretty well when the board has already been pre-assigned to mostly white people, with again, exceptions, but mostly on average, again, it's about looking at outcomes on a countrywide level.

0:15:58 Thomas: On average, if white people were given those spots on the Monopoly board, they had, back when we were divvying up this Monopoly board, when it was basically free, by the way, like back in those days, it was like, hey, if you can get a horse and get on out to this parcel of land, you just own it now. That's fine. As long as you're white. This is really what happened in a lot of cases. And then further down the road, there's examples of, hey, if you, if you're, again, if only if you'RE white, we'll get, we'LL help you. The government will help you with a home loan to buy a home. And owning a home is one of the best ways, if not the best way, for the average person to generate long-term wealth in this country. Home ownership. It just is. And that was denied to black people. Those loans were denied to black people in fact it's worse than that.

0:16:45 Thomas: They weren't even allowed to give anyone loans if they were going to give loans to black people. So, like, you had to agree not to give any loans to black people to qualify as not risky. You know, the banks were like, well, it's too risky, we're not going to give you this loan if there are any black people in your neighborhood. So it's really horrible. And that's, had you know, that there are many more examples, examples that have had long-term effects and have built that foundation to where you look at that Monopoly board, and what do you know, that, yeah, sure, there's a couple examples, there are a couple of examples of people owning squares on that monopoly board who aren't white, but largely it's all white people who own those squares. And so when people say, hey, we'll play by the same rules, you roll, hey, you roll an eight, then you land on that square, and you got to pay whoever owns it.

0:17:31 Thomas: Whoever, I don't know who owns it? I'm, I'm race blind. Whoever owns it, you know, know, you pay them rent and and of course the comparison is that when you all play by the same rules, but when you are handing out the squares, white people got to get all of them and keep it in their uh in their families and generally generationally have access to that wealth generation. That's in in simple terms, that's a huge problem. That's never going to be fair.

You are never going to reach a fair outcome by saying, okay, from now on, everyone plays by the exact same rules. You are never gonna reach just outcomes with colorblind policy. That's something that it took me a long time to realize. And it's something also that people I've debated in the past, people who I think are um really badly misinformed and and probably worse are probably intentionally trying to be misinformed, willfully ignorant, I guess you would say. People will say any rule, any law, any anything, any policy that prioritizes race, that's racist. And and that's the great trick to say it, it's it's why I called them status quo warriors, people like Stephen Knight or Sargon, uh, you know, Carl Benjamin and those kinds of people. They, they, they are status quo warriors and it is very

0:18:57 Thomas: Convenient that the status quo favors exactly the kind of demographic of those people. I mean, that's just what it is. And it's, it's a very easy, convenient defense to be able to say, no, no, no. Hey, we can't have any. Whoa. If we do reparations, that's racist. That favors black people. If we paid reparations. Are you kidding? We can't do that. That's more racism. You can't fight racism with more racism. Well, actually, you cannot fight racism. You cannot fix racism by being colorblind. You cannot do it. The best you could do is make things semi-equal in some circumstances going forward, but that will not fix what has gone on. Because when you look at the numbers, America is not actually the land of opportunity and the bootstraps.

0:19:45 Thomas: You know, it's funny because America is supposed to be the, you know, the home of the American dream. It's right there in the name. It's named after us. But they have these scales of which countries are best and that you're best able to achieve the American Dream. And guess what's not number one? America. And I'm not making this up. I pulled it up just now. I pulled up the study. It's a World Bank's measure. Let me read this to you. The U.S. does not fare particularly well on this metric. 12.5% of children born in the 1980s to parents in the bottom half of educational attainment distribution end up in the top quarter. 88 of the 135 countries for which the World Bank estimated this figure had a higher share and all but three.

0:20:33 Thomas: So, you know, 88 had higher. That's we're not in last or anything, but we're we're not doing well. Well, and listen to this part, all but three of the 35 countries, the World Bank identified as high income developed economies had a higher share. So we are out of 35 countries that the World Bank has identified as high-income developed. So that's their metric, but I'm sure it's a decent metric. We are 32nd out of the, the America for achieving the American dream. And that is the idea of rags to riches. That's the idea. It's actually using statistics instead of just using Republicans intuitions about how we're all we're the best country. We're just the best. We are only in America.

0:21:20 Thomas: Only in America? Yeah. Yeah. 32nd out of 35. So only in America and 31 countries that are better than us. Out of 35 of the high income developed countries where you can go from the bottom quarter of or no, the bottom. I guess it was a bottom 12.5% of educational attainment and end up in the top quarter of, I guess, income. I think it is. It just, it's, we're not very mobile. Almost every other country that's a high income developed country is better. No, they're not like double that number. You know what I mean? The top one is apparently Cyprus. That sounds pretty cool. 22.8% instead of ours was 12.4%. 12.8%. 22.9%. By the way, UK is fourth, 18.6%.

0:22:08 Thomas: But yeah, so don't you think that adds up over time? I mean, if you look at the numbers of actually how frequently people who are born without money are able to achieve, you know, nice high incomes in this country, it doesn't happen very often. The best predictor of how you're to end up, I think, is zip code and or the income of your parents is the best predictors. It's not 100%. Again, nothing is 100%. It's as though everyone born poor stays poor. We know that's not true. There are plenty of examples. And what the right likes to do is cherry pick examples and say, look, it's possible. Look, it's possible. Yeah, but it's a lot harder for some people than it is for others. And there are reasons for that. Now I'm taking a look at another measure, which is an upward mobility measure.

0:22:57 Thomas: And boy, is this graph depressing. There's one that tracks upward income mobility in the U.S. over time. And since the 40s, it has just cratered. And I believe that's because of conservative policy over time and wealth accumulating at the top and us not investing. There are a lot of things that go into this, but us not investing in things like health care, child care, you know, schools, things that would enable people without wealth to gain wealth. We aren't good at those things. America is not good at Those things. You all know this. Here's a here's a quote from this article in Forbes covering this study. The U.S. is one of only four high income country economies amongst 50 economies with the lowest rates of relative upward mobility.

0:23:49 Thomas: Um, yeah, this is the problem. And think about that over time. Um, if back, sure. It's one thing to say slavery happened a hundred and whatever, 50 something years ago, it was, it ended. I don't care about the math, something like that. Was it 1865? I don't remember. Anyway, it landed then let's say, okay, we'll start then. When was the time that black people in this country were going going to have achieved equality. When would that have happened? Is the question I think I asked Carl in that debate or maybe in some other debate. I just want people to tell me the year that they think equality happened. Was it the day slavery ended? Was it maybe in the 60s with the Civil Rights Act? Because when you have a bunch of people who have been brought here against their their will and enslaved, and then you stop doing that, but then you give them nothing, nothing.

0:24:45 Thomas: In fact, you give, it's so depressing. It's so sad. You all know this already, but in case you don't, not only do you not pay reparations to slaves, you actually pay reparation to the slave holders for having taken property from them, quote-unquote, because when you ended slavery, you took property from the slave owners. So, of course, you'd have to pay them. That's what happened. So when is the time when this particular population of people who, again, were brought here against their will and enslaved, when is the time when they would have achieved equality without having without us doing anything just naturally? I think maybe never. I mean, mean, I guess never as a long time.

0:25:31 Thomas: I don't know, 30,000 years of what things eventually even out. I don't know. Maybe not, though, because when you have wealth, you can keep wealth. When your family has wealth, you can keep wealth. And these numbers show that when you are born without wealth, it's incredibly difficult. It's incredibly rare to be able to build that wealth. Even if, even if you, we were 100% certain there was no racism happening, no systemic reasons why people would have been held back, so it's always hard. Gosh, I didn't mean to do this, but it's so hard to even talk about the current problem of racial injustice and systemic racism without trying to go into this kind of history. That The only reason I do it is, like, I was ignorant to all this. This was not something that was known to me until I sought it out 10 years ago, whatever it would have been.

0:26:19 Thomas: I don't know, eight years ago. Something. I don't know. How long has the quarantine been? Five years? So maybe 15 years. No, you know, after I started podcasting and became, you know, intellectually curious and actually started learning from other people who maybe aren't white. I didn't know all this. And maybe if you didn't know it all either, maybe this will help. So it's not. And so all this was to say, that's how I started this. There was a focus on colorblindness, and I hope I have demonstrated why that will not do anything. Here's the next thing that I don't think will do much. And this, who knows, maybe you'll disagree with me. And it's also the reason that I find the book White Fragility to be, again, while very good in parts, ultimately, for me, it doesn't quite do it because it is obsessively focused on the individual.

0:27:19 Thomas: And there's a balance. Again, this is kind of a tricky line to tread because I read one of my least favorite people who I'm sure, I know Jamie disagrees with me on this, but I'm sure other people will too, is Matt Taibbi, who writes for the Rolling Stone. And boy, boy, I cannot stand him. I'm not a fan. He's definitely good on some issues. He has done good work on poverty. He wrote a book about the big banks that was pretty good. I know he's genuinely liberal on a lot of issues, but he and Greenwald are in the same boat in that Democrats lost their minds and made up all the Russia stuff. He is that kind of person and it drives me crazy because it's just not true. And he spends most of his time beating up on Democrats for thinking maybe something weird was going on with Russia and Trump.

0:28:12 Thomas: Uh, and also he, he wrote a scathing review of White Fragility. And I, to me, it, it echoes way too far. So I'm treading, I know, it's fine line. White Fragility, I think it falls a little short. I think there's many valuable insights in it. And I would still recommend that white people read White Fragility because I think it will help you notice times when you would be doing something that you shouldn't be doing as a white person. I mean, particularly Robin DiAngelo talks about credentialing, and that's something white people try to do. You hear it all the time in different ways. They do things, they say stuff. And I've actually heard several examples in the news in the last few weeks. They say stuff like, "I don't see race."

0:28:58 Thomas: "No, I don't see race." Or, "I have, how could I be racist? I have black friends. How could I be racist? I marched in the 60s." And she has noted that in doing diversity trainings and all this stuff, the white people there often do try to like give their bona fides or whatever on why they aren't racist. There's a lot of things like that. You know, there's a lot of good stuff in this book about how racial dynamics and how white fragility might cause problems in a corporate environment and a workplace and whatever it is. Those are very valuable, and I think that they're very helpful. So I think the book does a lot good. Where I think it slightly goes too far is it really, really, really, especially toward the end, focuses in on the individual and like obsessively focusing in on yourself and your whiteness and what it's doing.

0:29:51 Thomas: To a point where I just think it goes a little too far. I think It's a little Too, and I'll tell you why in a minute. But speaking of the thin line I'm trying to draw, ah, Matt Taibbi really overreacted to this, I think, because he literally wrote, I have the quote, like, DiAngelo isn't the first person to make a buck pushing tricked up pseudo intellectual horseshit as corporate wisdom, but she might be the first to do it selling Hitlerian race theory. White fragility has a simple message. There is no such thing as a universal human experience, and we are defined not by our individual personalities or moral choices, but only by our racial category. If your, if your category is white, bad news, you have no identity apart from your participation in white supremacy.

0:30:39 Thomas: Uh, end quote. Yeah. So, like, I think that goes a little too far, specifically when you're saying it's Hitlerian. So he's actually, like, literally he's comparing it to Hitler. So I think a slightly fragile response on the part of Matt Taibbi. And in my opinion, I think there are people like Matt Taimbi and like others who genuinely don't want to be racist and want to work toward racial justice. And I think he does. But I think anything that would tell him he could could be part of the problem is a threat, I think, in my opinion. And anything that would tell him maybe you can't be the leader of this discussion, that you can't be driving the entire discussion, that you indeed might have to look inward a time or two, I think that's too far for some people.

0:31:34 Thomas: I think. This is me speculating. I think sometimes that's too far. And it's hard, you know, and it's something that, again, I think it's a fine line to tread. So, so I think that criticism is going too far. But, you know, I hadn't said anything about White Fragility for a while. And then I heard Ezra Klein mention it and say that he also didn't think it was a great book in some ways. And so that kind of made me think like, well, maybe I'm not crazy. Maybe I'm wrong. So here's why I think it goes a little too far, I'm going to draw an analogy that I want to acknowledge is not a perfect analogy. I want to say it is not. I'm acknowledging that this is an imperfect, but I think useful analogy. I think this is a little bit like when we all say we want to solve climate change.

0:32:23 Thomas: And so therefore we're like, well, am I using plastics? Am I driving? Oh, maybe I could ride a bike one day instead. And it's like, okay, that's fine. It's not bad to focus on that. But like the top 100 corporations or whatever it is contribute 75 percent of the of the global emissions or whatever that stat is, but anyway, the point is, when you look at the numbers, our individual little choices do almost nothing when it comes to climate change, just about nothing, unless you are a giant corporation, then in that case, you could do a whole lot. I, I want to, I want to acknowledge again, this is not a perfect analogy, and I'll tell you why, because my individual, individual, you know, CO2 emissions, if I decide to drive when I shouldn't be, you know, that, that isn't going to do a whole lot of individual harm to anyone.

0:33:15 Thomas: Now, as taken as a whole, it does some amount of harm to the environment. But whereas when it comes to racism, individual racism can absolutely be deadly. It can be horrible. It is horrible. So I'm acknowledging up front that it's not a perfect analogy, but it's not totally off either, because what I think these protests have shown, and I think we've even seen it in a lot of black leadership and black thought today, which is, hey, it's great that you all want to, you know, read a book and and try to look inward. Meanwhile, can we just dismantle systemic racism? I mean, really looking at the systemic issues, trying to fix systemic problems. Problems. And it's hard because I, for one, don't know how to help do that.

0:34:02 Thomas: You know, I want to. I want to help. In my opinion, I think voting in better politicians does help over time. The problem is it takes a long time and you get a bunch of duds, you know, like you may get someone who wants to fix something and they can't. Or you may be, again, there was, it was, who was it, the Minneapolis mayor. You may elect someone who really wants to fix the problem. They genuinely do, but they can't. They are unable to because of police unions, whatever it is. That's why it's systemic. That is why it is such a difficult problem and that is, I think, a big reason why change has been so slow or non-existent. It is genuinely a tough problem. And I worry, here is my worry, an obsessive focus similar to climate change.

0:34:48 Thomas: This is where I think the analogy is useful. I want to acknowledge for like a ninth time, it is not a perfect analogy, but it's useful because an obsessive focus on your individual racism or, or whatever your individual attitudes or how you're looking at everything, an obsession into that, I think will do not much, not nothing, but not much to dismantle systemic racism. I mean, maybe if we all do it, I suppose, I mean, we should all do it. I'm not saying we shouldn't do it, but not obsessively. So I think that there, there's a diminishing return there if all you're focused on is, "Oh, am I, oh, what do I say here? Oh, am I doing" and there's not a bunch of focus on, "Hey, let's work together to do some major reform here, to vote in better politicians, to, uh, figure out a policy that's going to correct for just decades and centuries of injustice." That's what will do more more good for more people, is all I'm saying.

0:35:48 Thomas: I mean, if, if you, it's, and honestly now more than ever, like we've got, everyone's got shit going on. You know, like if you maybe you only have X time a week or X dollars to try to help towards fixing things. And I just think if you're at a limited time and you could do one of two things, you could read white fragility and really obsess on your every individual thought regarding race, or you maybe read a black author and look into ways to change policy in your, wherever you are in your community and volunteer or donate to a politician who you think is going to change. Policy that probably will do more good for more people.

0:36:36 Thomas: So that, that's, that's where I think the comparison is. That's where, in my opinion, White Fragility, it's just a little too, it gets, if you read the book, it goes so far down the rabbit hole of focusing on policing herself and her every word and interaction that it almost turns narcissistic in a way. And it's a fine line. I mean, you know, like, I'm not saying 0%, I'm saying it's 80%. You know, there's a lot of value there. Still recommend reading it. But if you reading it, and this is just, again, this is all my opinion, so if I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I, I'm always learning. I'm, I'm always trying to, to get stuff right. But in my opinion, if you read White Fragility and you get through the end, and you're like, it's kind of weird toward the end, like, it's just a little, a little too, you know, that's fine, in my opinion.

0:37:26 Thomas: So I'm talking about how to be an anti-racist. Here's one. I should have spent more time on this, but, but because I just like it better, uh, it's, you Know, I have less to say about it because I think it's really good and you should read it. It's also quick note, it's also more personal than I would have imagined. You know, again, I read Stamp from the beginning and that was much more about history and a very good book. But this one is very personal to Ibram Kendi, I think. It's much more about his life and his process. He started off, I think, more racially conservative. I don't know what the correct word would be there, but certainly he's learned a lot. And actually in the book, well, maybe I don't know if I should give it away, but he has some health problems that I was like, oh, my God, he really hit.

0:38:11 Thomas: I didn't know. And it was it was emotional at times. So I highly recommend the book. It's great. Some interesting things I wanted to talk about it. Oh, pause on that. Let me pause on it. There's one more thing that I wanted to bring up to illustrate what I think is the flaw in focusing on individuals too much, a little too much when it comes to trying to fix the problem of systemic racism. There has been an obsession with, and especially lately with this new Trump book on, has Donald Trump used the N-word? Has he used the N-word, it's, it's a major thing, apparently to some people as to whether or not Donald Trump has used the N-word.

0:38:57 Thomas: And here's the thing that, that I can't remember if I thought of this or somebody said, but But the weird thing is, it probably would make a difference to a lot of people whether or not he used the N-word. Like, I don't care if Trump or Mitch McConnell have never used the n-word in their lives. It's almost irrelevant. You know, like almost is. It's not completely irrelevant. Don't get me wrong. But they are racist and the things they do are racist. And perpetuate racism and perpetrate injustice and make things worse for black people in this country. Not to mention Latinos, all kinds of Native Americans. They're broad in their racism. It's not just anti-black, but it's largely anti-Black in policy, that is.

0:39:45 Thomas: I don't care if they've never said a bad word in their life. They are racist. But I think because of the, the obsession by white people on individual racism, on, on, "Oh, did you say something there? Are you, are you bigoted in how you look at?" I think because of that obsession, and in my opinion, that has led us astray in terms of fixing this problem. For some reason, it's going to matter. I actually think that if there were a tape that gets released tomorrow where Trump used the N-word, no, don't get me wrong, 35% of the country will love him even more, um, but I, I actually do think there's like a five to ten percent who would be like, "Oh, wow, he is racist." Somehow that was the information they needed. "Oh, my God, Donald Trump, is he used that bad word." And I think that's a real shortcoming of that focus, people.

0:40:43 Thomas: Can do, I mean, Bill Barr, I don't, who knows, maybe he's never said the N-word. No, let's be real, he has. But like, if he, if Bill Barr had never said the N-word, he would still be incredibly racist. It just really doesn't, the point I'm making is not that saying the N-word doesn't matter. I very much don't think it does matter. And I will not say it, even though I've had black friends who have been of the opinion that we should be able to say it if you're reporting on it or something. I'm just not going to do it. It's not worth it. What am I, what's the upside there? It's not my word. I don't care. Not going to use it. And, uh, I think it's incredibly offensive when you do, and I'm going to avoid it at all costs. And I don't find it particularly hard to avoid. I don't feel any burning desire to say that word, seems to not be a big deal to just not say it.

0:41:30 Thomas: So why not just not say it? But anyway, so I do think it's a big and I will not say and it's not my word to say and all that. So I'm not saying it's it's not a big to say it, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is when you are in charge and in in power and harming Black people in this country on a system-wide level and making their lives hell, it doesn't much matter if you've been very careful with your language. There's too much focus on that. That's the point I want to make. Way too much focused on that, and again, I really do think it would make a difference. I do think a tape of Donald Trump saying the N-word would make a difference to 5 or 10 percent of people, and it shouldn't. It should make no difference. We we should already know who he is. And I think most people do, but a lot of people don't.

0:42:16 Thomas: So back to How to Be an Anti-Racist. Again, I mainly have less to say because I love the book. I recommend it. There's just a couple of interesting points I wanted to reflect on and give my thoughts on. In particular, there was a point where Kendi did a real, they had us in the first half, not going to lie. I love that meme because he started talking about whether Black people can be racist. And I was like, oh, this is interesting, because this has been something that I don't know, I've been a little confused on. This is this is not something I feel too sure on, but there are a lot of progressives, who, a lot of people who have defined racism to mean systemic racism. In other words, white people can't be racist because you need, you also need power, you know, it's like, like, you need prejudice and you need power, and then that's racism.

0:43:10 Thomas: And for the most part, it's like, okay, sure. If that's how we're going to define it, fine. But part of me has always wondered if that is useful. Now, I'm not sitting here doubting the reality that's happening. I think we all, or not all of us, but if I'm having a conversation with somebody about the dictionary definition or whatever definition of racism, I don't think we're disagreeing on what's happening, right? Don't think we're disagreeing on the fact that systemic racism is a huge problem and racism against white people basically does not exist in this country at all and isn't a problem. I don't, we're disagreeing on that, but I have wondered, uh, we're just talking about words now. Like, what, what is the most useful way to use words? What's going to do the most good. And I've wondered what we're gaining by doing this thing where we say Black people can't be racist and white people can, because of, you know, power difference and stuff.

0:44:05 Thomas: And I've wondered, what like, what we're gaining. And I really want to explore these arguments in best faith I can. So I think the best argument would be, well, it illustrates the aforementioned fact that racism against white people is not a problem, and also that white people, systemically, on an average overall basis, have the power, and they are the ones who are able to make their racism matter. So their prejudice matters more. Whereas if you are, for example, Black and, like, prejudiced against white people or something, to say nothing of the fact that maybe there's good reason you're prejudiced because white people in this country, if you're a Black American, but like, you don't have the power to make that matter.

0:44:50 Thomas: And I think so, that's, that's the, I think that would be the argument. And if I had that wrong, somebody, by all means, correct me. But I believe that would be the argument, I think. That's an okay argument, but I don't know that that does much for someone who doesn't already agree with you, you know, and I worry that we lose more people who might be able to agree with us by defining things in a way that just, like, to, to not as informed white people feels unfair and impossible. Like, wait a minute, only I can be racist, no one else? But what if a Black person was just really hated? Why they can't ever be racist? And I don't know, so that's kind of how I felt, I've been confused on it. I'm not, I don't have a strong opinion. Um, you know, if, if it just turns out that this is how we want to define the word, fine.

0:45:39 Thomas: Um. I'll go with it. I really, I just, I've always wondered if we're, if we'RE gaining much, you know, it's, it's, it's sort of like the people who already see the problems of systemic racism, they'll already see it. And defining the word, it doesn't gain you anything, but it might lose you some marginal people. That's how I felt about it. So when Ibram Kendi in his book starts talking about, can black people be racist? I was like, oh, this is, maybe it'll be about this. Maybe I'll learn what his opinion on this is and maybe it will change my mind or maybe he'll agree with me or something. Who knows? And then I start reading it and I realized he's making a different point, which I think is also a very good point, which is he started talking about black people in power and he started talking about, for example, Ben Carson, or, uh, there's some other, uh.

0:46:25 Thomas: Sheriff, who's that, just awful sheriff, uh, is it Clark? I can't remember, but, uh, other, other Black people empower. And he said, what do you mean that they can't be racist? And by the way, I, I need to emphasize the entire, um, definition and the, and the sort of the basis that, uh, Kendi is going with, the base assumption and how he's defining things in this book, which is very important. I shouldn't have skipped this, sorry.

Uh, is that a person is neither racist or anti-racist, it is a person. And again, it's, it's another reason why I think we should focus less on the individual and whether or not, like, they are a racist. Um, it, it, by, it, by reading people like Kendi. Um, people can be both racist and anti-racist at the same time. He defines it very simply, and I think usefully so, that you are racist when you support policies that have a racist outcome, and you are anti-racist when you support policies that try to fix that and try to make things more equal. And that's how he defines it. That's what that book basically, that's where he starts the book, and kind of the rest of the book is written illustrating those definitions and using those definitions. And that's interesting. And again, I don't think, for the most part, I am going to be disagreeing on what's actually happening, on the actual physical manifestation of whatever's happening in the world.

It's what words are we using to say what's happening, and why are we defining them how we are? And I think this is a great, useful way to define things. A person can be, and Kendi goes into his history and talks about when he was a racist.

0:48:09 Thomas: And while he does have some quotes about how he thought white people might have been aliens at some point, because he really didn't, wasn't a fan of white people for a while, probably still isn't, but anyway, uh, he wasn't really talking about white people, he was talking about Black people, he's talking about in his history. He didn't have a good view, uh, and didn't espouse good policies for Black people. He kind of had one of those, like, bootstrappy views that, that Black people ought to be able to, you know, pull up their pants and blah, blah, the Bill Cosby kind of thing. I think Kendi had some of those beliefs in his past. And so he starts talking about, can Black people be racist? And I, you know, what he meant was, hell yeah, they can, against Black people.

0:48:57 Thomas: You know, Ben Carson is racist against Black people when he supports an administration. He works in the Trump administration. You know, Sheriff Clark, if I got his name right, I think it's the Minnesota sheriff or whatever, ex-sheriff, hopefully. He can be racist when he supports Trump and these policies. And the point is, oh, and I think he brings up Clarence Thomas as well. God, yeah, that's a good example. Yes, Black people can be racist because they can support policies that further racial gaps and further racial injustice. And so, yes, they can be racists. Very interesting. Again, he had me in the first half, not going to lie. I thought he was going to talk about whether or not Black people are going to be racist toward white people, because that sometimes is, again, it's a topic of conversation.

0:49:44 Thomas: But no, it is very interesting. He is talking about the fact that oftentimes black people support racist policies and therefore they are racist against black people. And by his definition, the way he defines things makes sense to me. I think it was very interesting. But the whole reason is because they are powerful. He talks about this idea that black people can never be racist because of the power indifference. And then he goes into examples. Sorry, are you telling me Clarence Thomas has no power in this country? One of nine Supreme Court justices deciding on the most important issues in the country? Are you telling you he has no power? Cannot be racist because he has no power. And it's it's very well done.

0:50:30 Thomas: I really, really, I don't know, opened my mind up a bit on that issue. So, so again, love the book. Recommend it. How to be an anti racist by Ibram Kendi. And let's see if that's the end of my points that I want to make. I think so. The last thing I wanted to talk about, and this is something, again, I am really, this is a provisional belief, but one place I, one thing I do doubt, and it seems to basically be the prevailing consensus among progressives, is that capitalism is by definition racist. And actually, I think there's a quote where Kendi says racism is by definition capitalist or something like he gets, he kind of flips it around both ways.

0:51:21 Thomas: Um, and I, that I just don't know about. And I know I have plenty of, uh, socialist listeners or communist listeners, or maybe even some anarchists or something or like, Oh, Thomas, that's just cause you love capitalism. And it's like, eh, I don't know. I don't if that's it. I, I think it doesn't just, I just don't think it makes sense. I don't think definitionally you have to be racist to have capitalism. I just Don't. And I'll give you a very simple reason. You know, the reasoning goes, well, you have have an exploited class. You have to have an underclass. You have to something. And that's how, you know, that people at the top make the money kind of thing. Okay. I'll grant you that. Even though I don't know that that's strictly speaking true. It seems to be true in practice. Don't get me wrong. Um, and, and And certainly capitalism has very racist effects, especially how it's in practice now in the U.S.

0:52:14 Thomas: I'm not at all disputing that. But not to sound flippant, what if we all just decided to base our capitalism entirely on exploiting women, for example? Would that mean it was racist? Like, we could, we get, like, just hypothetically, you have a society where women are. And honestly, it may somewhat resemble this society, because a lot of child care, emotional labor, all that kind of stuff is not counted how it should be in our economy. Um, so much of women's, typically, you know, stereotypically, work that women do is undervalued. All that stuff is absolutely real. What if you took that to an extreme and just decided, well, women just were, they can't even make money, then they, they just have to basically work for free. You could still have an exploited class. It would have nothing to do with race. My point is, I don't really think that definitionally you have to be racist to have capitalism. It may be true that you, you have to be exploiting some underclass of people.

And I suppose, to steel man, or steel - people like to use a gender-neutral "steel man, straw man" thing, and that's probably a good idea, I forget to do that from time to time - Aaron over on Philosophers in Space is "steel bot," which I like, but I think oftentimes it's confusing, people won't know what he's talking about, but whatever, steel person, steel bot. To steel bot that, maybe you would say there always has to be an underclass. And maybe you would say, since humans are just so predisposed to being prejudicial racially, or to people who look different, that therefore it will always involve racism.

0:53:54 Thomas: And that would be the best argument. Maybe, maybe that's right. I don't really necessarily think it's right. I think that it's at least very much a possibility that you could have capitalism that doesn't rely on racism. I think that's true. Now, I know the socialists listening, the communists listening, do not think that's true. They think that the only way to have capitalism is by exploiting people. And I think they think that because they think the only way a CEO or a boss or whatever makes money is by ripping off workers. And I disagree, because of my background in economics, I actually don't think that is how it works. That is perhaps another discussion.

0:54:39 Thomas: Now, again, in practice, often it works that way. And don't get me wrong, I think that that, that's, we should be more focused on the fact that CEOs make way too much, workers make not enough. Absolutely, we are way, way, way, way too far on the other end. I want to, as I've often said, there is so much common ground in where I want to go between me and your average socialist, that for the time being, I think we almost agree on everything. And if we get to the point where I'm saying, "Hey, this is too far for me," we're going to be in damn near a utopia by that point. So there's going to be a long way to go in societal progress terms before we, we get to the point where I'm disagreeing with the socialists on which direction we need to go, because we're so far into just robber baron bullshit capitalism.

0:55:34 Thomas: So, uh, I'm just talking about in principle and definitionally, I don't actually think that capitalism has to be racist. I don't, I don't, but I, again, practically speaking, we're so far on the other side of things right now that it's not an argument that I, you know, am dedicated to. It's an afterthought here that I wanted to mention. And I wanted to say that if you think I'm wrong, which I very well could be, I'm happy to read more on that.

It's an issue I want to learn more about. But I think there are ways to make money as a company, as a whatever, as an inventor, as a CEO, whatever. There are ways to make money and to add value that don't include simply ripping off workers. I actually, that's what I believe because of, of, again, what I learned in my econ classes, but I grant that we are not really there, that overall we are way too exploitative, and if you look at it as a spectrum of, you know, just absolute no-rules capitalism and some sort of socialist ideal, we need to get way closer to socialism, I think, way closer. So, that's just an afterthought. All in all, I recommend both books, if you can only read one, read How to Be an Antiracist, I think. If you have the time to read both, read them both.

And again, I want to emphasize that there's a lot of value in white fragility and there's tremendous amount. I think it will help you as a white person realize a lot of the ways you can go wrong. I Think it's very helpful in that way.

But if you read it and you think, ah, just something about it is just a little, a little off, a little too inward focused, a little too narcissistic, a little too obsessive over, you know, your every thought and feeling about it.

0:57:27 Thomas: You know, if you think that, then you're not alone. If you don't think that maybe I'm wrong and we can disagree. That's okay. All right. That's the show. I hope that was valuable. I know it was, it was what it is. It's me. Let's face it. This is what the show is. If you like it, maybe you liked it. If you don't, then don't listen to it, I guess. But had some thoughts to get off my chest. There you have it. Thanks so much for listening. If you do like the show, you can support it all the normal ways or just share it. If you think this was a good episode, share it with somebody so that more people can find it. It's hard to find podcasts these days because there are so many of them. Hard to be more seen as a podcast. But all right. Thank you. I really appreciate you listeners so much. And I'll see you next time.

0:58:20 Clip: Thank you so much for listening to Serious Inquiries Only. If you like the show, the absolute best thing you can do is support us at patreon.com/seriouspod. The second best thing you can do is please share it on social media or by word of mouth. Speaking of social media, if you'd like to follow Jamie on Twitter, she's at Euthyphro. And follow me at SeriousPod. If you'd like to be Facebook friends, send me a request at facebook.com Thomas podcast. If you're not up for that level of intimacy, that's fine. Maybe you want to join the discussion at facebook.com/groups/SIO members. Thank you again for listening. We'll see you next time.