270
submitted 1 year ago by girlfreddy@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

A brilliant film emerged from these skirmishes – but its core insight still takes work to unpack. For generations, a persistent myth that black families were irreparably broken by sloth and hedonism had been perpetuated by US culture. Congress's landmark 1965 Moynihan Report, for example, blamed persistent racial inequality not on stymied economic opportunity but on the "tangle of pathologies" within the black family. Later, politicians circulated stereotypes of checked-out "crackheads" and lazy "welfare queens" to tar black women as incubators of thugs, delinquents, and "superpredators". American History X made the bold move of shifting the spotlight away from the maligned black family and on to the sphere of the white family, where it illuminated a domestic scene that was a fertile ground for incubating racist ideas.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] masquenox@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

What do you want?

Lots of things.

Do you want a shot in utero where the switches for white supremacy are flipped?

No.

I think the whole inherent racism thing

There is no such thing as "inherent racism" - in the same way that there is no such thing as "inherent Islamism" or "inherent monarchism."

but you seem to say that the interactions we experience in the film are secondary to something more systemic

Yes.

Frankly, if you don’t put stock in the interactions the movie depicts, then what hope do you have?

Actually, if white supremacism worked the way the movie depicts it would be utterly hopeless - we'd be left with no option other than to declare that white supremacism and the reason it exists defies understanding... which it simply doesn't. That is the liberal conceit of the movie - that racialization is (somehow) "natural" to humans when it so obviously isn't.

To hear you say it’s institutionalized makes me feel like it’s hopeless,

That which is institutionalized can be dismantled - we are literally dismantling a small piece of it right now.

and my babies, in spite of their colorblind nature now

Your babies are not "colorblind" - not being able to see "race" is not some disability (you know... especially considering that "scientific racism" is literally pseudo-science despite the fact that it dictates so much of our reality in "western" society). What you meant to say is that your children have not been socialized into viewing the world through a white supremacist lens.

That is impossible to avoid - white supremacism is not something you are born with, it is something you are born into. White people don't get to opt out of it, black people don't get to opt out of it - that is what is meant when we talk about our society being fundamentally white supremacist. It cannot be avoided - but it's conceits can be understood, it's camouflage ripped away, it's tenets debunked, and, ultimately, the institutions that rest upon it can be thoroughly discredited. That is one of the main reasons the alt-right exists - people becoming more and more aware of how deep the white supremacism iceberg goes frightens them. There's a good reason we call their ilk reactionaries.

this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2023
270 points (89.5% liked)

News

23367 readers
2573 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS