Skip to content

Do You Even Have a Black Friend?

November 9, 2010

White pseudo-anti-racists have created a loophole that allows them to wallow in their white supremacy.  Everyone knows the snark about the black friend, right?  Snark that white pseudo-anti-racists wield against other white people who attempt to speak about what their black friend has said about a particular subject.  Of course, white people with no black friends have used the “my black friend said” as a ridiculous argument device.  It immediately becomes obvious when someone does not really have a black friend and is substituting an imagined black friend as a genuine black friend.  We know it is an imagined black friend because strangely the black friend just happens to regurgitate every single opinion said white person has previously stated.  It is not lost on observing eyes that the white person with the imagined black friend is usually arguing a point that tends to fall to the right of most social-political ideologies.  At this point in history, we must acknowledge that is far right, because currently, center happens to be very right already.  In that sense, the white “left” (for lack of a better word), also known as the white “anti-racists” have managed to become the face of the morally superior,—the white side that actually cares about black people.

White lefts are so familiar with the black friend concept that they can even laugh at themselves and make an excuse for not interacting with black people at the same time.  One such example is how Stephen Colbert (court jester for the white left royalty) made fun of searching for a black friend (Naturally, he disguised it as making fun of the white right).  He presented it as a requirement that all good white left people must meet.  It has to be, since the lack of a real black friend is used against the white right.   Colbert’s main poke was demonstrating how white people go about things such as combating anti-racism as if it is nothing more than an item on a checklist.  The whole nonsense about actually interacting with black people is ignored and instead replaced with the invigorating chase and the satisfying end.  Such as finally being able to check off something that gets you a pat on the back.

Get black friend.

So if any white group appears to be concerned about blacks, it seems to be the whites on the left or so that is how they wish to be perceived. It is not as if the “left” does not have a valid hook, a believable shtick because they do, –on the surface.   When comparing the “left” to the right, one thing is for sure; the white right does not know how or care to hide their racism.  They are so passionate in their pursuit to maintain white supremacy that there is little time to catch and control any conveyance of racism.  They “stay the course” while racist accusations are hurled at them or not.  Whereas the white left is so easily distracted when called racists that no actual anti-racism works gets accomplished.  Not only is no anti-racism work done, the left is so diverted that the right gets most everything they desire.   White people, particularly left-leaning white people need to feel good about their social-political image. Feelings don’t need actions in order to materialize. Essentially, a typical white person’s accusation of racism toward another white person has nothing to do with left whites or right whites actually giving a damn about racism, but a tool for those whites to wield against each other.  In other words, in most cases it remains all about white people.

Therefore, when the left is laughing at the right and their imagined black friend(s), I have to wonder if those laughing, ridiculing, and engaging in “gotcha” even have a black friend.

Thus, when white people rely solely/mainly on other white people to understand racism and/or work through racism, it becomes a minefield for those who are truly interested in doing something about perpetuating white supremacy.  It is like eating yourself out of a poisonous haystack.  How will you know which straws to eat and while you are choosing the wrong ones, what are you going to do about the built-up toxicity from the bad straws you have already eaten? Will you be able to recognize those straws?

This post is the first post in a three (maybe four) post series.

23 Comments
  1. November 10, 2010 1:04 am

    ” Essentially, a typical white person’s accusation of racism toward another white person has nothing to do with left whites or right whites actually giving a damn about racism, but a tool for those whites to wield against each other. In other words, in most cases it remains all about white people.

    Therefore, when the left is laughing at the right and their imagined black friend(s), I have to wonder if those laughing, ridiculing, and engaging in “gotcha” even have a black friend.

    Thus, when white people rely solely/mainly on other white people to understand racism and/or work through t racism, it becomes a minefield for those who are truly interested in doing something about perpetuating white supremacy.”

    Kitty, Kitty, Kitty…out of the damned ball park with these observations (And your dry wit made it even more enjoyable to read)!!! 🙂

    • November 10, 2010 1:51 am

      You know Deb, I am aware that in our current social-political climate if you are against the left it is assumed, grossly, that you are in favor of the right. It is as if the right not to agree with either has vanished from existence. Nevertheless, I get so sick of the left not doing a damn thing but still holding on to the image that they are the ones who care, the ones who would do something if only they had a chance. The ones doing the talking and being listened to don’t care about shit other than their bank accounts.

      But I still have so much swimming in my head, such as how “white trash” and/or lower economical whites are supposedly just racist, if not more than the do-gooder liberal elite left, or so the liberal elite left would have you believe.

    • November 13, 2010 6:52 pm

      Hey Kitty…apologize for the delay in replying, master procrastinator that I am these days, I had to do some shit I’d been putting off til the last minute! 🙂

      “It is as if the right not to agree with either has vanished from existence.”

      “The right not to agree with either” never existed for either of those alabaster sides of the same coin in the first place. Right, Left, whatever – same thing. A rude awakening for some (it was for me) – but Lawd it is a necessary one! The lower economical whites are no more racist than the do-gooder, liberal, elite left – they’re just more honest with theirs. Sort of a Jim Crow vs James Crowe, Esq. thing – with the latter seeing opportunity – not equality – in the frontin’ at what James Baldwin called, “the welcome table.” And it worked, and continues to, in certain degrees.

      No need to get so sick of it Miss Kitty, just recognize it when you see it. What you do with it is on you – cuz these folks surely could give two shits.

  2. November 10, 2010 3:26 am

    Yes, I agree, Kitty. These folks don’t really have any black friends. And they’ve turned the idea that you should into a joke. I have had many white acquaintances, but I can count on one hand the number of actual white friends I’ve had. Most of my white acquaintances have been too busy patting themselves on the back for even deigning to speak to me to ever really get to know me, let alone care about me. After a year of acquaintanceship, they might express surprise at the kind of music I like or the kind of books I read, while most certainly having been congratulating themselves for our “friendship” the whole time they’d been making stereotypical assumptions about my likes and dislikes.

  3. la redactora permalink
    November 10, 2010 2:59 pm

    “You and null other bloggers like this post”

    Kitty, I don’t think wordpress likes you?

    Thanks for the parsing this, I look forward to the rest. You’re right, it always just circles back to being about whites. Like when white countries invade a place, all of a sudden the feel-gooders are all about “getting to know the people there” but once the war is over, or they just lose interest, they no longer give a damn, because it was just a political tool for them. And really it is just the stupid, leading the obnoxious.

    Most of my white acquaintances have been too busy patting themselves on the back for even deigning to speak to me to ever really get to know me, let alone care about me. After a year of acquaintanceship, they might express surprise at the kind of music I like or the kind of books I read, while most certainly having been congratulating themselves for our “friendship” the whole time they’d been making stereotypical assumptions about my likes and dislikes.

    With “friends” like those you really never need enemies. And you’re always supposed to be so grateful, that they deigned to lower themselves at all. It’s like, no, I’d rather you just stayed on your high horse, thanks.

    • November 11, 2010 6:21 am

      It’s like, no, I’d rather you just stayed on your high horse, thanks.

      Yeah, no kidding, redactora, about this and about the way they do the same thing all over the world.

      I think they particularly hate that black Americans can see through it. There’s always this insinuation that nonwhite non-western people see white lefties differently than American blacks do, so American blacks should just shut up. Of course, as you suggest, white lefties don’t really have any idea of what nonwhite non-western people think of them, and they don’t really care to. They just want to be sure that these “others” aren’t influenced by, or even, when it can be helped, made aware of, American black opinions on the subject, because they somehow think they’ll fare better with non-western nonwhites without our input.

  4. la redactora permalink
    November 10, 2010 3:01 pm

    Okay, well now it says “you and one other blogger.” Pssht.

  5. November 10, 2010 9:48 pm

    Thank you, Kitty! That is so good!

    You’ve been horribly objectified, Margaret. I know you know that, but it’s just not right when you become a “thing,” valued for a reverse kind of status. I’ve felt that as the working class friend or charity case. Or now that you’re a famous writer (you, Margaret) you have a status you didn’t have otherwise, but you know you can’t trust it.

    I love my friends for their good hearts, good politics, courage, and how interesting they are. The more they’ve fit in with the power system and have belonged to and identified with the het, European-descent,US male-identified, class-privileged culture, the more smug, boring, and not-too-bright they seem. (I’m talking about Separatists, Radical Lesbian Feminists, and a few Radical Feminists here since I don’t hang out with men.) The least privileged seem to be the smartest and most interesting and fun, which important in friends! So I don’t understand how those little elitist clubs can bear each other’s company.

    I’ve written in my article on classim about how classist the US Left (mostly European-descent and class privileged) are and how they despise poor and working class people (which includes most of the People of Color in the US)– which also means that many class oppressed people don’t trust the Left. It’s like a game to feel superior for the privileged. And I see a variation on that in some of the “Radical Feminist” writing with their in-groupy, cliquey, elitist and/or academic writing styles that you have to learn before you can be accepted (never as an equal though). Both groups really don’t like to learn from the past or from those they oppress.

    I agree about the “poor white trash,” who often are part Indigenous. That was my mother’s culture. She grew up with the US rural poor racism of the Twenties, but when she escaped to the city and met Africa-descent girls at high school, she was proud when they befriended her. She had no political analysis or education, but she felt best with the class-oppressed with their warmer hearts, and that meant loving her racially oppressed friends too (including her husband and later boyfriend.)

    The “poor white trash” are the scapegoats of the privileged Left. I remember the coal-miner couple from Kentucky on The Amazing Race. They said, “We’ve never met gay or Asian people before, but we love them.” They allied immediately with the kind gay male couple and Asian male couple. That was so interesting because you know they’d been getting the propaganda, but they recognized reality when they met it and followed their hearts. (Maybe they made other good friends, but I can’t remember the details!)

    What the elitist Feminist version of the Left forgets is who was behind the beginning of our Lesbian Feminist culture. I kept telling those who carried on against acknowledging the realness of our differences that if their attitudes were in place in the early Seventies, we would never have had our best writers and thinkers — who were race-oppressed and class-oppressed.

    I also like what you wrote, la redactora!

    • November 11, 2010 6:31 am

      Hey, I remember that couple from Kentucky too! My mom and I were rooting for them. And they did get along better with the more marginalized teams than with the middle-class white ones.

      What the elitist Feminist version of the Left forgets is who was behind the beginning of our Lesbian Feminist culture. I kept telling those who carried on against acknowledging the realness of our differences that if their attitudes were in place in the early Seventies, we would never have had our best writers and thinkers — who were race-oppressed and class-oppressed.

      I’m glad you said it. These women seem to want to completely erase that history, preferring instead to focus on the middle-class white women who fought for the vote or for birth control in the early part of the 20th century. Those were the same white middle-class women who shunned lesbians (who had always played a large role in those movements) and excluded black women, though (often with the blessing of black men like Frederick Douglass). And the new middle-class white “feminists” have embraced that tradition rather than adopting the ideologies of the lesbian/black/poor separatists who followed.

  6. November 11, 2010 6:47 am

    It’s that usual divide and conquer, which so many other privileged people try — the US Left and some aspects of Lesbian Feminists too, like when Sonia Johnson just flat out made up Lesbians to quote who would then deny their racial and ethnic heritage and culture for her benefit. Well, the privileged are more able to go to other countries so then they can tell those they oppress here what those other cultures are really like. From what I’ve seen and heard with friends and aquaintances, US African-descent Lesbians are more savvy about political issues that any other group of Lesbians. At the Butch Voices Conference in Oakland last year, it was the African-descent Butches (and one Fem friend) who I thought were saying the most radical and pro-Lesbian statements, in spite of all the pro-trans crap. When they left as a group one evening to go to a separate Lesbian of Color dinner, the entire feeling of the conversation changed to being less radical and much more boring.

  7. November 11, 2010 7:01 am

    From what I’ve seen and heard with friends and aquaintances, US African-descent Lesbians are more savvy about political issues that any other group of Lesbians.

    I believe it.

    Even straight black women who have black women’s empowerment at heart are more savvy than their straight white counterparts. I read a blog pretty regularly where the author has actually advocated separatism for straight black women. She’s suggested that since black men obviously don’t give a shit about black women (and since it goes without saying that the rest of society couldn’t care less about black women) that perhaps black women should create their own communities. And she even went so far as to say that they would have to exclude women with teenage sons (which, of course I’d say get rid of them all, big or small, but still) and any woman unwilling to give young boys the boot once they got to be certain age or size. You NEVER hear straight white women talking about getting rid of sons for the sake of the women and girls in a community. And, yet, the black women having this conversation don’t even consider themselves feminists.

    What are white “feminists” talking about when it comes to their own empowerment? Stripping and fucking as many males as possible?

  8. November 11, 2010 7:43 am

    That’s incredible and very hopeful for even non-Feminists to be saying such things. Well,it makes sense for the most oppressed to be more aware. Even just talking with strangers in stores in Oakland, I find such a radicalness and awareness among African-descent people of all ages, including men, that I don’t find as much when talking with European-descent people. The African-descent people around here are also very class-oppressed, so that’s part of it too. I just know I can start to talk about how the government did the 9/11 attacks and how someone else than who we know about is actually in charge of the government, and if Obama really tried to make changes, they’d just kill him, and of course they know it too and share other similar ideas.

    So yes, the white “Feminists” don’t have a clue if they’re just doing what men want them to do. It’s the old con.

    As I’m writing a new chapter for our book, I’m realizing that it’s more the Lesbians who are somewhat Feminist who most support castrated men against the rest of us, while my non-Feminist friends just naturally find them repulsive and want them gone.

  9. November 11, 2010 8:11 am

    It is really sad the way so many “feminists” support castrated males. I think “feminist” has become an “identity,” in the pomo sense of the word, rather than denoting women whose politics are pro-female. And if “feminist” is a pomo “identity,” then it makes sense that they’d support other people under the pomo/queer umbrella over female people who don’t necessarily consider themselves “gender-fuckers.” “Feminist,” like “genderqueer,” or pansexual, or kinky has become in some circles an “identity” that straight white middle-class women can use to seem cool and rebellious.

    • November 11, 2010 11:12 am

      And what I mean by ‘pomo’ or ‘post-modern’ is the idea that nothing means anything, that a person can identify as whatever they want to without regard to the way they are perceived by others or power differentials amongst different identities. The idea is that the powerless have as much freedom to identify as oppressors as the powerful have to identify as the oppressed. Therefore, oppression isn’t real, just a figment of our imaginations that we’ve all – oppressor and oppressed alike – agreed to make real by acting like oppressors and oppressed. And since anyone can choose their “role” there isn’t anything inherently oppressive about hierarchies.

      This school of thought is very much responsible for the idea that straight white middle-class people can be queer if they simply identify as something other than straight. The fact that they are a white man and a white woman in a sexual/romantic relationship with one another is ostensibly not more real – that is, based in reality – than the fact that one of them identifies as neither male nor female and fathoms that this makes her “genderqueer” (rather than female) and her partner “pansexual” (rather than a straight white man).

    • November 11, 2010 6:05 pm

      Talk about major eye roll when I read a female who is married to a male fretting about coming out to her family as queer. Give me a fucking break.

    • la redactora permalink
      November 11, 2010 6:19 pm

      “gender-fuckers,” even their names are as repulsive as they are.

  10. Level Best permalink
    November 11, 2010 2:09 pm

    “It’s like a game to feel superior for the privileged. And I see a variation on that in some of the ‘Radical Feminist’ writing with their in-groupy, cliquey, elitist and/or academic writing styles that you have to learn before you can be accepted (never as an equal though). Both groups really don’t like to learn from the past or from those they oppress.”–BevJo

    You’ve just nailed why I’ve felt very uneasy and unwelcome at some professed radfem sites and couldn’t quite figure out why. As a working-class Appalachian, I’ve been excluded from feminist groups IRL, and I’ve felt the same sort of thing “virtually” at certain blogs.

    “I think ‘feminist’ has become an ‘identity,’ in the pomo sense of the word, rather than denoting women whose politics are pro-female.”–Margaret

    Yes! Sharp and true observation–again, you’re putting into words things I’ve felt but couldn’t quite understand. There are entire blogs, shared writers, that are like this.

  11. November 11, 2010 6:43 pm

    I didn’t see Kitty’s or la retractadora’s comments the first time (they don’t all show up until later, do they? And I have no idea how to say “like.”)

    Anyway, love that! I wish you’d all been with me the nighta few months ago when my stalker, the castrated man, got up into “women only” space tp bellow his “song” slandering me virtually by name, with his little group of “Feminist” supporters smirking at me. And as soon as I later started to read “I don’t like conflict, but believe in self defense….” they got up and walked out with him, except for one who kept yelling at me to “correct” my use of male pronouns for him.

    I still haven’t learned to let go and let god and say “It’s all good,”
    as you can see.

  12. November 13, 2010 7:50 pm

    I hope you all know that “god” part was a joke. No god for me.

    • November 14, 2010 2:08 pm

      LOL. Yes, I knew it was a joke. I always think it’s funny when people insert god into conversations, jokingly or seriously. My favorite is answering machine messages ending with “Have a blessed day.” Ha! That one really cracks me up every time.

  13. November 13, 2010 10:35 pm

    A couple thoughts:
    The Stephen Colbert thing makes me think of a white latte sipping liberal who is very passionate about being Politically Correct, except in cases where they are called out on being white privileged assholes, but thats the Stephen Colbert fanbase for the mostpart so its probably over their heads.

    Also I’m reminded of a public forum I was at around police brutality (the police where I live kill the fuck out of unarmed young black men) and the white liberal racism coming out of a very passionate young crusty white anarchist kid. The forum was diverse with a great deal of reactionary black church groups but what struck me was this white dude getting up and lecturing them about their own history, and to study the black panthers and read this book and that book.

    Its that pretentious shit that drives me nuts, like as a white person (myself included) we know more about how to fight racism because we’re so energized by SOUL ON ICE.

    Another thing is when a black person is talking and all the white people are silent “listening” but then go on to ignore or shoot down everything they say matter of factly. There’s no respect.

  14. November 14, 2010 9:32 pm

    Now, our idea of a “blessed” day would not be what most would think!

    About the “white liberal racists” — even when Oscar Grant’s family asked that the demonstrations (about his being openly murdered by a BART cop, who just got only 2 years) be non-violent, there were large groups of people who smashed windows and looted. They looked like the same people who “pied” (with cayenne) Lierre Keith in the face at the Anarchist Book Fair in SF. They had the same black outfits, with their faces covered, but enough to see they all looked European-descent. They are anachists, I was told (and I’m guessing mostly class-privileged too.) Some will be agent provocateurs (I did see one going to an Oscar Grant demo, after the speakers finished — he was young white man who was in clean, neatly pressed camouflage with a metal baton sticking out of his pack — and he tried to hide when he saw me). But others will be actual anarchists and leftists who are predominately class-privleged white racist assholes who don’t even live in Oakland, but who came here (why?) and ignored what Oscar Grant’s family requested so they could smash up Oakland (often little businesses owned by People of Color), and then will contribute to the lie that the “rioters” are those “dangerous Black people in Oakland.”

    How many of these white “anarchists” are paid by the government?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: