zlacker

>>sn_mas+(OP)
The quote in the title of the article is really an inappropriate way to try to describe inclusiveness. It’s not about being less, it’s about including others more.

>>philis+Cg
Insulting and demeaning racial groups is the opposite of inclusion. It breeds resentment and hatred. For a time there was a focus on treating people as human and not as [racial/sex/religion]

Trend these days is to encourage openly being a bigot, just as long as it’s against certain people.

Replace the word white with any other social group and perhaps you’ll see the problem.

>>treema+Yj
"White" isn't a racial group. "White" as an idea to describe a group of (roughly) light skinned European people, came about in order to justify enslaving and subjugating other groups. Various groups worked their way into being considered white over time, in part by contributing to the subjugation of others. And various groups once considered white, later were not considered so.

"White" as what you call a "social group" was created in service of this power dynamic. Before, say, about 400 years ago, whiteness was not an idea used to identify a "race" of people.

So yeah, I'm all for being less white. I'm fine with just being like ... Irish.

You can research the history on this pretty easily, but a good place to start is a podcast series from Scene On Radio called Seeing White. My memory is a little fuzzy but I think the broad outline is correct.

>>newmnh+Vr
Then why not come up with a better word? They say to never attribute malice to something that can be explained by incompetence, but I cannot help but wonder if tying essentially class-based activism against "systemic racism" where class correlates with race based on past non-systemic racism (I base this on reading So You Want To Talk About Race and New Jim Crow and taking copious notes - the former actually says that even if every single person became genuinely non-racist the systemic racism would still not budge, among other things) is a ploy that the movement has evolved semi-intentionally. If you argue for class-focused equality, there are various arguments that could be made against you from morality, history, etc. If you tie it to race, suddenly the counter-arguments seem racist.