Wednesday, July 2, 2008

white quotation of the week (tim wise)



Carmen Van Kerckhove: One of the choices you seem to have made is to really work with other white people. When it comes to anti-racism work, it seems like white folks sometimes end up in kind of a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation, where I think if they seem too actively involved, there’s this sense that maybe they’re trying to, you know, take things over from people of color. But then, it just seems like it’s a little bit tough to negotiate a space in which you can really do work and not create any sort of negative reactions to that. So what have you found to have worked for you personally and among other white racism activists that you know? What advice do you have to white people who are listening to this who want to get involved in this work?

Tim Wise: First it’s to accept that you will screw up. I mean, I screw up on a pretty regular basis, and I think that’s part of doing this work, particularly if you’re a member of the dominant group fighting a system of oppression from which you, at least in relative terms, benefit, there’s always gonna be questions. And I think they’re good questions. I think it’s perfectly valid for folks of color to wonder just what the hell am I up to, and what the hell are other white folks up to, doing this work.

I get that. I wouldn’t trust me either if I was in that situation. But ultimately—and I think women who wonder why men are doing anti-sexism work have every reason in the world to ask that question—I’d be worried if folks weren’t asking it. What I do hope, however, is that those of us who are white, when we do the work, and we get challenged, that we don’t, just sort of, give up.

I mean, what I see a lot of times is white folks, when they get challenged on this, when they get some of that push-back from people of color, who frankly have no reason to trust what we’re doing or why we’re doing it, it’s like we almost think, “Well how ungrateful!” You know?

And I think that’s because a lot of white folks come to this work with the mentality that we’re doing it for other people. And, one of the things I learned doing community organizing, working in public housing in New Orleans for about fifteen months with a great organization down there called Agenda for Children, that was connected to the People’s Institute for Survival and Beyond, which does anti-racism training, was that they really taught me—and I haven’t figured it all out—but they taught me the importance of accountability, and trying to be responsive, and responsible to, people of color, understanding that ultimately we want to follow the lead of people of color, but that we’re not doing it for them. . . .

For those of us who are white, I think the way we can remain responsible and accountable is to have an accountability network. Now, it’s easier to have that, perhaps, if you’re doing grassroots activist work. Nowadays, that’s not the work I do. As a writer and someone who speaks around the country, it’s been a lot harder for me, in all honesty, to have a strong accountability network. So what I try to do is make sure that when I write something, I send it out before I ever post it or publish it anywhere, I send it out to several hundred people, both people of color in grassroots situations and organizations, as well as white allies. I ask for feedback, I ask for criticism, and I’m always open to that even after it’s published. I’ll go back and change something in an article if it’s problematic, if some way that I said something is messed up in someone’s mind, or if they didn’t think I said it quite as well as I could’ve, I’ll go back and rework it.

In fact, I did that with the entire book, White Like Me. There were some, I think, very valid criticisms of the initial volume, and some of the things that I left out, some of the ways that I said certain things. I actually went back and fundamentally changed the book, because I wanted to make the book, of course, as strong as it could be, but I also wanted to reflect the notion of accountability, that if I’ve done something that is not helpful, or done something which wasn’t as helpful as it could’ve been, I want to go back and try to rework that, and try to get better at it.

And accountability’s never going to be perfect, but I think part of being accountable is being open, making yourself open, exposing yourself to that kind of critique, and then taking it really seriously when it comes in. It doesn’t mean that every criticism’s valid, and there’s some people who are just not going to want to see white folks do this kind of work at all, and that’s fine. For me, I always come back to the fact that in the end that I’m not doing this for people of color. I’m fighting racism and white supremacy because I think it fundamentally diminishes my humanity. I think it diminishes me, I think it diminishes my family, I think it ultimately puts me, and the entire country and the entire world at risk.

So I don’t really need permission to fight a system that I think diminishes me and I think may destroy all of us. But I think, permission or no permission, I do want to try to be accountable, and I want to be listening to what people of color are saying, following their lead, not dictating the agenda. Not going in and saying, “Well, the issue here is obviously A, B,or C,” when in fact people of color might say, “No, the issue is D, E, or F.” And I have to be open to learning and listening as much as teaching and speaking, and I think that is what white folks can keep in mind as they go forward.


[Transcribed from a preview of Addicted to Race Premium, which you can subscribe to here. Hat-tip to Why Am I Not Surprised? for the "quotation of the week" idea.]

16 comments:

  1. Maybe this quote should inspire you to be more accountable for the "white people in movie theatres" business, rather than going about saying that you did it as an experiment and expected the responses you received. Sure, everyone makes mistakes, and that's human and totally expected. Mistakes turn into learning experiences when you acknowledge them and don't act in the same way in the future. Tim Wise acknowledges that he's still learning and makes mistakes, why can't you?

    Also, why did you make vague references to your "credentials"? Why didn't you expand on that? It's sort of a strange thing to throw out there as an excuse without explaining yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  2. hello anonymous,

    I posted this quotation because I certainly do find it inspiring, and I hope others do too.

    You write about mistakes I've made and failed to learn from, but you didn't describe any of them--could you tell me what those mistakes are? I'm always trying to learn from my mistakes.

    I don't think I made a vague reference to my credentials. jw did, with a decontextualized quote of my specific/non-vague reference to them in another thread. In that other thread, I first brought that up in the midst of a discussion about authority, and who's given credibility (or authority) in discussions of race--I was wondering if people would receive what I say here differently if they knew that about me (and it certainly did make the person I was discussing the topic in the initial thread with me see me differently). So I brought that up for that specific reason, within that "expanded" context--I didn't just throw it out there "as an excuse without explaining myself."

    Does that answer your questions? Sorry for the long, detailed explanation. One thing I'm learning about anti-racist writing is that I should explain things that confuse anyone as clearly and fully as I possibly can. I see myself as responsible for making myself understood, not the other way around (though it does save a lot of trouble when people read as carefully as I try to write).

    ReplyDelete
  3. I saw Tim Wise speak at a college for the first time a few years ago and I'll never forget how impressed I was by the way he began his talk.

    After a lengthy, GLOWING introduction about what he has accomplished in the field of anti-racist activism, Tim stepped to the podium. His first words to the audience were ones that were intended to instantly diminish his importance/intelligence/wonderfulness/expertness.

    He paid homage and respect to the many people of color in his life who have educated him about issues of race and social justice, and he referred to everything he was about to share with the audience as "borrowed knowledge"

    I really appreciate him.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Actually, I think he might have said "stolen knowledge" but don't quote me.

    ReplyDelete
  5. KGWP,

    Re: the stolen/borrowed knowledge thing, I couldn't believe how when (re)reading an excerpt of Black Power, by the late Stokely Carmichael (Kwame Toure | rip), it was like reading the anti-racist Tim Wise articulates in a time warp, like Wise took what Carmichael said, verbatim and amplified it.

    That idea, the emphasis placed on White anti-racists working within the White community and viewing that as the place where their organizing efforts are needed, is one that causes debate and, perhaps, confusion. So I think the point Wise makes is critical: "we’re not doing it for them."

    Actually, I find Wise's idea about the effect racism/WHITE SUPREMACY has had on Whites, changing the make-up of their very soul and humanity, awfully compelling. I do wonder, though, how this idea of his translates into reality:

    hey taught me the importance of accountability, and trying to be responsive, and responsible to, people of color, understanding that ultimately we want to follow the lead of people of color, but that we’re not doing it for them

    The idea seems counterintuitive. There seems to be a contradiction in the idea of following the lead of POC while insisting that Whites doing anti-racism work aren't supposed to think they are doing it "for" them.

    It never occurred to me before now but I remember the awkward feeling I had when discussing things on-line in the past with a few White brothers and sisters who echoed those lines about following, e.g., Black people's lead and the attendant attitude that Black people, e.g., hold some key to some kind of special knowledge/insight about racism that they aren't privy to.

    It strikes me as odd because I feel, with Wise as an example, that Whites are fully capable of coming to an understanding of what's at issue when it comes to racism how it impacts THEM and others all on their own. Maybe Wise's own story about "borrowed" knowledge challenges my theory but I feel it's important that everybody brings something to the table, sharing knowledge about their experience if POC and Whites are to have a "dialogue" on issues regarding race which is the reason why I feel Whites examining Whiteness is important.

    The point seems even more important and strong to me when I did some quick net-research on the concept of how dialogue works: each participants is given space and consideration to speak about their reality, the perception and perspectives on it, in an effort to bring about greater overall understanding about the larger issues/society.

    Too often it feels like there's this push for our White brothers and sisters to speak "the Black man's truth" instead of their own (to use an expression I think I've heard used by Blacks to describe Tim Wise's work).

    ReplyDelete
  6. Very interesting, Nquest, lots for me to digest there.

    Could you explain this last part a bit more?

    Too often it feels like there's this push for our White brothers and sisters to speak "the Black man's truth" instead of their own (to use an expression I think I've heard used by Blacks to describe Tim Wise's work).

    The way you phrased that, it seems to me like a criticism of those Blacks of Wise. Is it? If so, could you explain more fully what the criticism is? Is it that Wise relies too much on Black knowledge, instead of on his own?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sorry--should be "a criticism BY those Blacks of Wise"

    ReplyDelete
  8. Could you explain this last part a bit more?

    The way you phrased that, it seems to me like a criticism by those Blacks of Wise. Is it?


    No times 2.

    1) The expression is meant is a compliment or exist as a statement of how Wise appears to understand racism the way Black people do with as much depth and sensitivity as well as considering it as important and as serious...

    2) What I tried to say by using the phrase is that there is a "White man's truth" to be told when it comes to anti-racism which is the reason why Wise, e.g., as I understand, seeks to examine Whiteness, White Privilege and, most importantly, WHITE SUPREMACY.

    Macon, I know I'm wordy but you stripped that "last part" completely from its context which is telling. I guess I could have been more explicit that phrase is compliment or credit to Wise but then I just assumed people would know that Wise is highly regarded in the Black community.

    I wish the phrase ("A white man speaking the black man's truth") would not have had you treating that statement in isolation to everything else I tried to say including Wise's "compelling" arguments about the self-interests Whites should feel/take in dismantling WHITE SUPREMACY because of how it damages them/their very humanity.

    If I was clearer when talking about what "dialogue" is then I would have specified how each race in a racial dialogue would talk about their experiences, reality and reflection on living under WHITE SUPREMACY (WS). So, stick with Blacks and Whites for simplicity sake, the White participant primary focus would be on explaining the impact WS has on them as opposed to talking about racism in general.

    An analogy might be marriage counseling which I assume can only be constructive when each participants accepts their own responsibility as far as the problem is concerned and stick to identifying their role in all of it and stick to talking about what they did or didn't do and what they are going to do to correct their share of the problem.

    AND the "dialogue" idea
    It's like you read that statement in complete isolation to what


    If so, could you explain more fully what the criticism is? Is it that Wise relies too much on Black knowledge, instead of on his own?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Macon, I know I'm wordy but you stripped that "last part" completely from its context which is telling. I guess I could have been more explicit that phrase is compliment or credit to Wise but then I just assumed people would know that Wise is highly regarded in the Black community.

    Telling? Whatever. All I asked for is a bit of clarification, to be sure of your meaning. Now that you've offered that (for which I thank you), I am sure of your meaning. I also wanted to be sure because it's related to the problems you've had with me repeating the words of, or speaking for black, and non-white people. I wanted to be sure just how and why you consider Wise admirable in this regard. And now I am, so no need to explain more about that here--I'm getting closer in the other thread to understanding your charges regarding my efforts to speak the "black [person's] truth."

    ReplyDelete
  10. I wanted to be sure just how and why you consider Wise admirable in this regard.


    Hmmm... That's strange. You claimed you wanted to know about the "criticism BY those Blacks of Wise" and NOT what I thought or consider. If you were genuinely interested in what I personally thought... what I thought, then you would have connected the "last part" to what I just brought to your attention about what I... what I find compelling about Wise's examination of Whiteness/WS.

    So, it's even more telling. More telling because you asked ME something about what *I* in complete isolation to other things I said which is telling because that's a routine of yours. You routinely respond to one simple thing in complete isolation to other things that contextualize things and add complexity to what I said.


    I'm getting closer in the other thread to understanding your charges regarding my efforts to speak the "black [person's] truth."

    No the hell you're not with that gross misunderstanding of what I just said here and the bridge you still haven't crossed there.

    I have charged you with or regarded you as "speaking the Black man's truth" (no offense was ever meant to women). I charged you with not knowing what the hell you're talking about when it came to what you called yourself drawing from Black people and had long since questioned how you could come up with some of the stuff you say after claiming you've been exposed to things Black intellectuals, e.g., have said.

    Not only were you confused as to whether the phrase was a criticism but you don't even know when you clearly have not been "charged" with "speaking the Black man's truth."

    You might have the interest but you're seriously lacking in the "depth and sensitivity as well as considering it as important and as serious" department.

    But then, that's not why I said I "admired" Tim Wise or, more precisely, what I said that was "CRITICAL" and "COMPELLING" about what Tim Wise "speaks on" with uncanny clarity.

    1) I think the point Wise makes is critical: "we’re not doing it for them."

    2) I find Wise's idea about the effect racism/WHITE SUPREMACY has had on Whites, changing the make-up of their very soul and humanity, awfully compelling.


    Okay, I did say the first point wasn't so clear but the essence of my post and the very context setting element that should have set up what I said about what I feel is the wrongheaded "push" of our White brothers and sisters to speak "the Black man's truth" instead of their own was this:

    I feel, with Wise as an example, that Whites are fully capable of coming to an understanding of what's at issue when it comes to racism how it impacts THEM and others all on their own... I feel it's important that everybody brings something to the table, sharing knowledge about their experience... which is the reason why I feel Whites examining Whiteness is important.


    If anything, you should have taken credit for what I'll readily credit you for - i.e. your efforts to examine Whiteness which would be, in some ways, "the White man telling the White man's truth."

    ReplyDelete
  11. (Typos a plenty):


    I have *NOT* charged you with or regarded you as "speaking the Black man's truth"


    I guess that's telling how you just take something and run with it when, as the old expression goes, "you don't know the half."

    Telling because if you are this willfully ignorant or just plain confused about what I've said then chances are the reason why you're so confused by the contentious stuff you've said that I've objected to is the proof-product of your haste in gathering information from other POC without really understanding the information you think you've gathered.

    You got a filter/prism problem, Macon. I might understand it when it comes to me, you've expressed how I've offended you by the way I "label" what you say, but when you misrepresent and interpolate things said by Hooks, McCall and, the blogger, Amaryah... That stuff is inexcusable.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Thank you for typing up the transcript, Macon. It makes it much more accessible to a wider audience.

    However, I'm trying to understand how communication works, how is it that two people can read the same text or witness the same event and have completely different interpretations. I want to figure out why is it that all of us reading this are supposedly literate in English, but we still have so many problems communicating with one another.

    Macon, can you explain Tim Wise's points to us, but using your own words? How would you translate what Tim Wise said about accountability, but in terms of specific actions for a wannabe "white anti-racist ally" writing a blog? Imagine that this wannabe "white anti-racist ally" is not you, but someone else. What instructions would you give a white blogger to remind him/her of accountability? (I want you to think objectively, which is why I want you to think of a white blogger, not yourself.)

    By "specific actions", I mean simple instructions that are fairly mechanical, such as a list of Do's and Don'ts for whites blogging about race and racism.

    ReplyDelete
  13. You're welcome, Restructure, and I'll think about your question(s). In the meantime, it woudl be helpful if you would explain how you see the quote, and how the other people you're talking about seem to see it differently.

    The first Wise-inspired "Do" for me would be to follow the lead of POC readers, however possible. In this case, I'll do that by asking you (and other POC readers who might see this), what Do's and Don'ts you would recommend for a white anti-racist blogger.

    I'd like to fulfill your request more fully when I have more time and energy--soon, I hope!

    ReplyDelete
  14. The idea seems counterintuitive. There seems to be a contradiction in the idea of following the lead of POC while insisting that Whites doing anti-racism work aren't supposed to think they are doing it "for" them.

    This is not judging the American or German way, just observations:

    I guess that this 'following the lead of POC' comes from a white anti-racist history in America, which didn't always follow but tried to dictate (and still does). In Germany anti-racism has its roots also in communist resistance (Antifa) against the rise of Hitler. Out of this today the Antifa is also anti-capitalism and anti-imperialism and anti-American(politics). We had the RAF (left-wing extremists/terrorists) and I think that they also influenced the left/parts of the left of Germany how they consider Germany as a nation and system.

    I already have a problem with the term 'anti-racism' because it is exclusive. Anti-racism lets the system intact. Anti-racism just implies that somebody is against racism and wants to end racism. But I don't think that racism will end as long as the system of (global) white supremacy will exist. And white supremacy is much more than racism. Racism is one pillar of ws, but not the only one.
    Racism and the impact of racism on people of color also comes from a non-sharing power-construct, so I think a democracy with real power for all people would be one part of a solution. Parts of the German Left try to learn from Venezuela and participatory democracy.

    Following the lead of POC means according to my understanding, that I listen to them and their reality. I include their experiences and thoughts in my understanding and how I see a nation.
    White anti-racists have to learn to respect the full humanity of POC and I think that this is extremely lacking also in a lot of anti-racist work (regardless America or Germany). Anti-racists should be pissed off by the same issues like people of color, this would be following the lead = working in solidarity with. But often they aren't, as the rally in Jena (America) for example makes it very clear.

    Working in solidarity also means, working towards the same goal for similar reasons and this means, that the skin-color/race of an "ally" is then no longer the main-issue. But as long as whites enter organizations with their Eurocentrism, which also dictates the way how such organizations work, I think multi-racial or multi-national organizations remain problematic/difficult. Whites first have to learn to let go their Euro way of thinking and acting, then they can organize with those POC who want to organize with whites or can say that they work in solidarity with POC.

    ReplyDelete
  15. In this case, I'll do that by asking you (and other POC readers who might see this), what Do's and Don'ts you would recommend for a white anti-racist blogger.

    I think this is your own homework. "Listening to POC" does not mean making POC do your homework for you.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Macon,

    I just wanted to thank you for the link to Katie's blog and her post republishing that article from Wise.

    ReplyDelete

Please see the "commenting guidelines" before submitting a comment.

hit counter code