- Jul 1, 2001
Bingo 100% agree. When it's just claimed they are teaching history that is not what it is. I love history and like learning new things from history and how we can be better. I roll my eyes when people expect people from like the ages of the crusades to act exactly like us for instance. We are way different than we were back then in all cultures. Kendi takes things way too far and if anyone hasn't read things about him he tries to indoctrinate people in Marxism as well. We can sign up for learning about misgivings of history and making sure it doesn't happen again and also placing the blame where it needs to go. It does not mean we need to say we in this generation are responsible for those events from 300 years ago and I don't want to learn about ideals of Karl Marx. No thanks.I think the whole "whiteness" thing is really nuanced AF.
I think it's actually OK to be opposed to a concept labeled "whiteness" that suggests someone who is "white" is inherently something different than someone who is not "white." This idea of "white" being different has historically led to the idea of "white" being better and should be opposed. Therefore, in one sense, opposition to "whiteness" as a concept of differentiation is a good thing.
However, it's not helpful, and in fact, counterproductive to oppose the concept of "whiteness" differentiation by saying "white" or "white" people are inherently bad, or inherently anything. Essentially, it's the same thing in reverse. It's saying that "whiteness" is inherently bad, when it's not really "whiteness" that's bad, it's "racial differentiation" that's bad. This is one of the areas where the well-intentioned "anti-racism" of people like Kendi goes to far into an unproductive, and indeed, polarizing "racialism." Not racism, but racialism.